Monday, March 16, 2015

Article Tools

A wooden teepee erected Wednesday, March 4, as part of a Santa Barbara City College art project was dismantled the following Monday after Native American students complained to school administrators, prompting a vigorous discussion about cultural appropriation and freedom of expression.

Second-year student Eric Heras, who is of Apache descent, argued the teepee contributed to a long tradition of negative stereotypes of native people. “I was shocked because I didn’t think anyone would be dumb enough to do that or ignorant enough to do that,” he said. Heras got in touch with area American Indian Movement (AIM) representatives, who also contacted SBCC staff.

The art students did not intend to create a structure that would mock Native American cultures, said Art Department Chair Joy Kunz. The piece was a time-based performance assignment, Kunz added, and the students intended for the space to be used by people to come together. “It’s a very simple premise,” Kunz said. “It’s not like they’re accomplished, professional artists making art to make a public statement,” she went on. “They are a class.”

Upon receiving the complaints, SBCC President Lori Gaskin and her staff convened a meeting with about 15 art students and approximately eight Native American representatives. The representatives, mostly Chumash, expressed anger, pointing out that the campus is a Native American burial ground.

Taken aback by the accusations, the art students agreed they would disassemble the teepee two days earlier than planned, Kunz said. Together, the students and the Native American representatives removed the triangle pieces of recycled wood piece by piece, a process that took about three hours. “Both parties were unhappy, but it was two communities coming together face to face, rather than digital accusations,” Kunz said.

In an email sent out to the entire campus, Gaskin formally apologized to the Native American community for the perceived insult. “I can assure you, such intent never entered the minds of these art students or their professors,” she wrote of their motivation for building the teepee. Gaskin also emphasized that higher education institutions provide a space for intellectual curiosity, exploration, and growth.

But Heras contends the school did not go far enough. “I don’t want this to be a slap on the wrist,” he said. “You have to make sure that this is not acceptable behavior. If I were to do something that was unacceptable, I would be reprimanded.”

Heras added that he was angry when he found a poster for the arts and music Lucidity Festival inside the teepee. “This is not just a college problem. This is a community problem,” he said. The art class is expected to issue a statement in the coming days.

During the last week, dozens of emails circulated between faculty members displayed an array of opinions about the teepee and its removal. SBCC English Professor Celeste Barber expressed sadness that the structure was disassembled, as she admired its architectural design and had planned to take her grandson there for a lesson about Native American life. She called its removal censorship. “For me, this goes to the heart of our constitution and the Bill of Rights,” she said. She compared the matter to the controversy at UC Irvine about removing American flags from a school lounge, as well as the Charlie Hebdo murders. “Where is it going to end?” she asked.

Barber’s written remarks prompted many to chime in via email. Some applauded her for taking a stance, claiming the issue could have been used to create a platform for understanding rather than divisiveness. Others disagreed, contending that offensive acts are still offensive even if the intent is not malicious, likening the teepee to a caricature or a shallow understanding of other cultures. As of this Saturday, a photo of the teepee was still displayed on the school’s Facebook page accompanied by dozens of comments from people who said they were disturbed by the project.

“We’re not looking for consensus,” Kunz added. “A whole lot of learning has gone on. Many performance artists would agree that the piece has taken on a meaning and impact that the students never imagined.”

A forum to discuss issues of cultural sensitivity is tentatively set for April 7 at 12:30 p.m. in SBCC’s Garvin Theatre.

Big Chief Thin Skin needs to get over himself. He would do far better being shocked, yes shocked, running gambling dens and gin joints is now how "Native Americans" are perceived in this country today.

Own your culture, your entire culture Heras if you deign to be its spokesperson. Otherwise you are just blowing smoke. Abe Lincoln owned his log cabin. So Apaches are now also claiming they are "local" SBCC students?

"Cultural appropriation" is BS censorship, it's Fascist, petty and shortsighted. Art and culture can only grow by constantly recombining and beciming somethging new. That means "appropriation" of previous works to build upon. Otherwise we'd just have flat stick figures on a cave wall today.

This is a joke right? A tee-pee is offensive? What about moccasins? How about tobacco?

Does this young man realize that tobacco was a Native American crop?

So using his logic, every person who has ever been a victim of tobacco (and there are billions) can lay that blame on the feet of the Native Americans. Stand by folks we're gonna call Barry Cappello, we've got a hell of a case!

Re-name it the PC-TeePee where all those suffering white guilt can rend their flesh with un-endangered eagle talons, until they finally transcend their manifest destiny privilege. Sage burning is optional, at extra cost.

"The art students did not intend to create a structure that would mock Native American cultures, said Art Department Chair Joy Kunz."

Exactly, but some people will read what they want to into this, and hide behind their heritage to justify their offense.

Here is the bottom line: If you are not of a demographic that has been historically oppressed, then you better well walk through life with your head down, endlessly apologizing for what *other* people have done, and hope that you don't inadvertently step on one of the endless cultural land mines that blanket the fields of academia.

P.S. The late A.I.M. activist Russel Means in his book "Where white men fear to tread" said that he preferred to be referred to as "Indian". (Hence A.I.M.) No matter whether one says "Native American" or "Indian", someone will jump on you for being "racist". You just can't win.

What about U.S. citizens, including legal immigrants who are offended by illegal immigrants who are having their city college educations subsidized and using up class resources while being here illegally and breaking the law daily?

Not sure if this is the same Eric Heras, but if so.. poor kid, sounds like he needs some love and meditation. (of course I feel for the victim as well, but it must be tough having to live with something like this):

Either way, Eric, since you are reading these comments, I invite you to checkout Lucidity. It could be just what you need. One thing is for sure, bro, you gotta relax a little. These art students were not belittling natives in any way shape or form.

It appears over at nativenewsonline that the community has quite a few people on both sides of the debate:

Wow! I cannot believe the comments that are being made here. Can't you people post your comments with better communication. Why are people so angry and hateful that you post things like what mr. Jarvis posedt. I mean really? That behavior further perpetuates that we white folks are racist and ignorant. It shows a form or powerlessness and desperation. Free speech is not hate speech. Mr. Heras is asking for us to respect his culture. How are hard is that? The rest of you cheering jarvis on for his bad behavior. What followers you all are. Try just try to see it from the Native American perspective not yours. We, feel so entitled to do whatever we want and then get upset that we have offended someone that had the guts to speak up. Haven't we done enough people?

Wow! I cannot believe the comments that are being made here. Can't you people post your comments with better communication. Why are people so angry and hateful that you post things like what mr. Jarvis posedt. I mean really? That behavior further perpetuates that we white folks are racist and ignorant. It shows a form or powerlessness and desperation. Free speech is not hate speech. Mr. Heras is asking for us to respect his culture. How are hard is that? The rest of you cheering jarvis on for his bad behavior. What followers you all are. Try just try to see it from the Native American perspective not yours. We, White Folks, feel so entitled to do whatever we want and then get upset that we have offended someone that had the guts to speak up. Haven't we done enough people?

SMTimes: "But his family, bolstered by an accident-reconstruction expert, strongly disagreed with that account, and Tuesday police and prosecutors acknowledged that the other driver involved — Eric Heras, 22, of Santa Maria — was drunk at the time of the wreck and was entirely at fault."

Eradicating Native American imagery from our entire culture is going to take some heavy lifting. We were just trying to lighten Eric's load.

Since surfing was invented by Native Hawaiians, I hope you have permission to mock their culture with your screen name, surfer girl. Looks like someone else needs to spend some time in the healing TeePee and think about your own cultural transgressions, SG.

You need to get the memo too - no more predecessor guilt after two generations.

"Centuries of failed U.S. policies and structural racism have led to intolerable inequities in health, well-being, and other life conditions that negatively impact the likelihood of young Native Americans achieving their full potential."

nativegeo, I'd worry more about offending any snakes tomorrow than worrying about the Irish. Animals have feelings too. Did you ever stop to think what they feel about St Paddy? My Guiness, this is getting hard.

Heras is of Mexican and Chiricahua decent, my guess. It would be hypocritical of him to celebrate cinco demayo, since Mexican's slaughtered so many Chiricahua. He must have a love/hate relationship with himself.

Surfergirl: A: You don't speak for me, because I didn't do anything; and B: If you feel bad about what "we" have done, and you live anywhere from the Bering Strait to Tierra del Fuego, than you are being hypocritical if you choose to remain here as you are living on "stolen land".

There are three ways one can approach this: A: Take the "Manifest Destiny" approach which says that the white race has the God-given right to rape, displace, and slaughter people; (per what happened to the Indians--among others); B: We can beat up on ourselves and endlessly apologize to people who hate us and will continue to do so despite our endless attempts at appeasement for the sake of gaining absolution simply because they are too blind to that most of us find what happened to the Indians appauling; or C: Agree that what happened to the Indians was horrific, teach history as it happened, and not through the bigoted eyes of people trying to whitewash America's sins, nor through the eyes of those who want to destroy America rather than make it better, and make sure that such a thing never happens again.

I vote for option number three.

By the way, from I can see, the teepee (assuming that is the politically correct word and I'm not stepping on that capricious minefield known as political correctness) is aesthetically pleasing and well-done.

It's awesome to see free speech so casually thrown aside by CC because of the ad hoc complaint by one moron. He probably worships the language of his oppressor murderer European Spanish as well...As an Irishman that is still under the absolute thumb of the English imperialists I shall celebrate my onerous stereo type tomorrow by drinking Guiness and whichever brand of Irish whiskey is cheapest...

Lemme see if I can take a stab at your comment/questions. First of all I don't necessarily think that the folks commenting here are angry or bad or racist. Putting aside the tone of the comments, it's the content that counts, and that said the reason these things are being said is precisely because they NEED to be.

They need to be because Lori Gaskin and cohort will NOT and Can NOT ( and believe me I'm pretty sure she is thinking the same thoughts )

Last of all I'm puzzled that you infer that "WE" are all white and that WE have done something offensive.

Agree, Gaskin appeared to throw her own faculty under the bus on this one.

Unless her goal, as stated, was to make sure no one was happy. Mission accomplished. Including the public on-lookers who stand here with mouths agape. One kid screaming trigger warning violation and immediately this shuts down an entire class project? Please tell us there is more to this story than that.

But regardless Gaskin proved one thing - the anachronism of teacher tenure that was designed to protect a faculty member's own exercise of academic freedom from exactly the mercurial wrath of surly mobs.

You hire your faculty to exercise best judgement to carry out their tasks to the best of their abilities. You don't immediately knee-cap them when they do, because some kid says his feelings are hurt. And brings in ten of his best off-campus friends.

According to the article and unhappy outcome, it appears Gaskin made no last stand for academic freedom and traded it readily for the whim of a kumbiyah pow-wow with enraged "Native American" activists on one side and broad-sided faculty on the other.

We need to toss out the fantasy of faculty tenure because in this case it protected no one. If you don't get the upside of tenure protections (academic freedom), then why saddle us with its obvious downsides (inability to fire incompetents).

"Tear down that TeePee", as if this was a harmonious mutual decision under the circumstance, only proves asymmetrical warfare works on our campuses today as well as the rest of the world today.

Plus now that SBCC has abdicated its entire campus to this pack of mouthy malcontents as sacred Chumash burial grounds, might as well shut the whole place down.

It is obviously time to rebuild a new SBCC, but this time on bedrock; not the shifting sands of PC.

Barber said what we are all saying - where will this end? That is the academic discourse SBCC needs to have; but you can't have it with shell-shocked faculty who now have to look over their shoulder less they offend someone before they even open their eyes in the morning.

SBCC flunked its teaching moment. UCSB faced a similar moment recently when students demanded trigger warnings on all course syllabi. UCSB faculty stared the students down and said no. SBCC needs to take some grad work at UCSB.

I feel the Chumash's anger and pain. You see, their culture was never technologically capable of building something as complex as a teepee. They lived in huts made of brush. They couldn't even figure out drums, using sticks instead.

In related news, Vincent Armenta, whose ancestry is 3/4 German, was re-elected as tribal chairman while the 12-story "finger in the sky" building project is well under way.

I could go with tempest in a teapot, but on the other hand if YOU had been part of a downtrodden, mostly genocided, weak remnant of a conquered culture YOU might be extra extra sensitive, too, like the Apache student. I share Prof. Barber's point, who feels the removal smacks of censorship in another sense. A collision of conflicting "I am right[s]". Sam gives a cool perspective, too.

Point is Volok, the pie can be cut in only so many slices. When art teachers make almost a much as the college president, there is nothing left to run the art gallery. A claimed to cost $100,000 a year, which is pretty daunting on its own. Do private art gallery directors in town make that much?

No one is that good at the junior college level of instruction that cannot be replaced, so the taxpayer pie can be spread around a lot better than what we are seeing here.

This demonstrates one more downside of tenure because its ever-increasing salary demands in exchange for guaranteed life time teaching assignments robs the institution of newness, flexibility and innovation.

Tenure is the academic equivalent of the Hotel California. To feed ever-increasing tenured faculty salaries even though they are teaching essentially the same courses every year to lower division students means you have to cut out extras or improvements, just to keep the same people paddling in place.

Time for tenure to go because PC has robbed colleges of any accompanying academic freedom, so it is now a no-win for those left paying bills. Colleges did this to themselves. PC was created by colleges and now will be the death of education.

This is surely a Tempest in a Teepee, but some of the comments are no better. In the grand scheme of things - which is more important? Excellence at SBCC, or a minor tiff about a tepee. Yet, it has been suggested that all of that excellence be shut down because of a minor tiff. When criticizing, do not appear no better than that being criticized. The Tempest in a Teepee has resulted in a Torrent of Triviality.

I commend Gaskin for a non-confrontational manner. Possibly this will calm matters and allow a further discussion among various people on campus. One thing to remember to those who were upset - "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" when done in a non-commercial manner. The SBCC teepee was an appreciation rather than disrespect. Which is not something that could be said about some comments on this matter.

Hey DD, two generations of self-inflicted self-hating only. You maxed out your guilt card. Feel more pain that after dozens of subsequent generations you today are doing nothing more than occasionally changing your own hair shirt.

The irony is community colleges in this nation stand for the best possible response to equal opportunity for all ever given by any one culture on this entire planet. And now they too are blamed as instruments of unforgivable imperialism and oppression? Your hair shirt stinks, DD. Take it off for good next time and breathe a little.

"But Heras contends the school did not go far enough. “I don’t want this to be a slap on the wrist,” he said. “You have to make sure that this is not acceptable behavior. If I were to do something that was unacceptable, I would be reprimanded.”

Heras added that he was angry when he found a poster for the arts and music Lucidity Festival inside the teepee. “This is not just a college problem. This is a community problem,” he said. The art class is expected to issue a statement in the coming days."

Since the SBCC digital warfare this event triggered on campus is public information, how about the Independent making a FOIA request in order to share this digital dialogue with the rest of the community? What is really happening on our college campuses today, inside out.

"I commend Gaskin for a non-confrontational manner." So we are celebrating Gaskin for not understanding the most basic tenets of free speech? Both Gaskin and Heras need to read our constitution and understand that while we protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority we do not condone giving special privileges to the minority simply because they say so. Such is the by product of the blanket claim of victimization.Indeed telling is the coalition of like minded commenters from wildly divergent political points of views...

How is even possible for an art teacher at a community college to pull in 180k a year? What the heck is going on here?

That's a 75k a yr job in SB and a 55k a year job in other cities in this state. 180k is just ridiculous. No wonder the school is broke, they pay themselves 3x the national avg and at over twice what they're worth...

We need an indictment. This is theft along the lines of the city of Bell.

Casualties of WWII: Over 60 million people were killed, which was over 3% of the 1939 world population. Many were white, male and Christian, who sacrificed their lives to save numerous downtrodden, and genocide d groups.

Gaskin's "non-confrontational manner" should be an embarrassment to academics, political philosophers, citizens, artists and anyone who believes in freedom of thought and ideas. This experiment was sort of mundane and tepid but deserves more of a defense of intellectual experimentation than Dr. Gaskin offered. Wouldn't you love to have her on your side when push comes to push back? She is only interested in building her career resume and is a sorry excuse for an academic leader. Let's move on.

Until our state education system recognizes its own inbred political bias, there is no hope for for them to be places of "exploration, intellectual curiosity or growth".

"....Who beat Microsoft and Google billionaires this year as the top contributors to Barack Obama’s re-election campaign? None other than professors up and down the state of California.

Employees and faculty affiliated with the University of California system came in as the top Obama donor in the 2012 election cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

The group’s OpenSecrets.org website notes employees and educators associated with the massive, 10-campus system gave nearly $1.1 million to the president’s re-election bid, beating out employees at companies such as Microsoft, Google and Kaiser Permanente......

OK RHS, after I vowed to never agree with you again when you equated RV parking with the black Civil Rights Movement, I too am repeating my mistakes...Gaskin has indeed demonstrated how completely unable she is to lead CC out of the mess she has helped to create in Santa Barbara. CC is not sustainable, does not educate local kids, and has brought a scourge on the Mesa and IV. They need a strong leader that can advocate and stand for actual principles and standards. She has no ability to do anything except ask for more money, cover her own ass, and worry first and foremost about her personal career.

LOLOL! These guys, the over-sensitive culturo-excusivists! Chief Thin Skin really needs to get over it. heck man, I'm of Black and Latino descent & if i were to get butthurt about every little "social injustice" Whitey puts out there I'd be a miserable jerk like Chief Thin Skin. What a FARCE!

my hair shirt is much less itchy than Thomas More's. Sure, this is just a tempest in a teapot and let the art classes do what they will, no disrespect was intended. Notice how troll Jarvis wrenches the thread over to compensation of the art teachers etc; so full of jealousy and hate... sad.

Ya Jarvis is a fool, there is no reason we shouldn't be paying our CC art teachers at least $500k a year or more. We need more bonds and more taxes and more theft because art. The best art comes from stolen money doncha know. We also need more art student graduates - with all the problems with water, poisoned food that lacks nutritional value, poverty and overseas wars don't you realize more artists will fix all of that?

Hey, we whities have to get over all the trash put out there every day by every micro-minority race hustler that can spell the name of the culture he elected him/herself to represent.

Let's start with the premise, no, we can't all get along we would all be a lot happier. Live, and let live works far better than all this kumibyah nonsense that is destroying others, for the benefit of some.

As long as community colleges exist for the reasons they were intended, the door to opportunity for everyone remains open. This is an extraordinary national commitment. And you can enter this world of opportunity even through the flap of a TeePee, but not with your eyes closed or a cudgel in your hands.

SBCC has betrayed its promise to be a door of opportunity for our local residents, not to the entire outside world that they now aggressively recruit at our expense. They just have to be a good little college doing what is best for the local residents. Got that, Gaskin?

There is a saying you can't copyright the multiplication tables. When something becomes part of the common culture and embedded throughout its commerce, no one person or group can later claim a proprietary interest.

One reason I salted my earlier comments with obvious "injun" talk was to show how much Native American culture has now become part of the Nation's common culture in thought, word and deed. Native American culture has been embraced in this country. Just ask those on the Gamblers bus to the Chumash casino.

Sure, frankly defamatory abuses need to be still sanctioned and that is why we have civil rights protections. But innocent representations of "injun" culture like the use of a Tee-Pee design (copyright) or use of terms like "pow wow or "peace pipe" or "smoke signals" that trigger instant demands for censorship means we have embarked upon a very perilous course in this nation.

I expect more from our public education institutions than to become hostages of this self-inflicted PC tyranny, particularly from outside groups, and then dare to call this a non-confrontataional response.

The key here is due process. If due process means outside groups can show up for a college sponsored kumbiyah sessions and threaten students to do their will, with no protection from college administration policies, you just posted the recipe for chaos. Don't insult me this was a harmonious mutual decision under those circumstances, because it was not.

Let us know what you do when the Neo-Nazi skin heads show up at your cosmetology doorstep and demand you stop teaching students how to style hair because it disrespects their culture that was decimated by the vicious forces of western imperialism. Would you back down in a New York minute like you just did to this alleged "Native America" group?

Easy solution to this problem: Rent a snow making machine and build an igloo in place of the teepee. I know for a fact that the Inuit population of Santa Barbara, and California for that matter, is very small and they don't kick up a fuss easily. I wonder if the American Indian Movement people are aware that the logo of the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) is a headdress? See for yourself: http://www.ncai.org/How is this not a cultural sterotype? Furthermore, young Indian children are sometimes taught how to build a teepee to make them aware of their cultural heritage. See a photo of this here: http://www.ncai.org/NCAI_2014_Budget_...

Well justbobf, I suppose some native Americans might feel offended because perhaps they were teased when they were younger by people like Jarvis when they mentioned their heritage, one could imagine Jarvis in grade school saying something like, "so, you're native american, do you live in a teepee??"

Of course this would be a very ignorant thing to say considering local natives didn't have tee pees and in fact the structure was confined to a relatively small percentage of native American tribes.

However at the same time, assuming that because this group was predominantly white that just because they put this type of structure up to assume that they were doing so in a way that would mock native Americans rather than simply being a memorable expression/activity to participate in is very presumptuous. I would imagine that many of the participants largely have a greater respect for the Native American lifestyle related to harmony and nature over the modern American lifestyle related to excess and greed.

So essentially there was a group that was in a way celebrating the positive aspects of Native American culture and it was shut down by somebody who got offended because they didn't understand and are likely bitter about some things in their life.

I do remember learning a friend in junior high who was Japanese tell me she was born in a concentration camp. I was shocked because I did not know Americans had concentration camps; only the bad Germans as this was still post WWII era.

Yes, we did dress up like "Indians" when we put on our requisite Thanksgiving pageants for both church and school. The point we got was to teach us respect for the role Native Americans played in our national history.

And then we went outside to play both cowboys and indians and later watch The Lone Ranger and Tonto on our 15 inch screen TV. So there you have my time capsule from the 1950s'. Later Marlon Brando set us straight.

My Japanese friend called it a concentration camp. I remember questioning her about that term at the time too. It seemed incredulous to me but I could not ignore the genuineness of her choice of terms which she reported without any rancor. Just that it was a fact of her life.

In her mind and reality she was born in a concentration camp, and she was correct. Just because ours were more benign than those in Germany does not alter her ownership of her own history.

It was a teaching moment for me when I asked my parents about this and in retrospect they gave a very sensitive account about that missing part of US history, which had of course been censored out of our school studies at that time.

Native Americans of Japanese descent had to fight for their proper recognition of their entire history too. I am only thankful they are not demanding we give them back sushi. At our core, we have always been a caring nation.

Meanwhile in Japan, my Aunt Sesuko was forced to watch her father and brothers be executed by firing squad by the Emperor's police. Why I don't remember being told. Sorry to go off topic, and certainly doesn't excuse internment/concentration camps.Remember that film "Bad Day at Black Rock"?

Your comparison to the specific Japanese-American experience isn't very accurate. Due to an infamous FDR presidential order about 100,000 Japanese-Americans were incarcerated during W.W. II, including some from Santa Barbara. I have had students whose grandparents were taken away from SB. I do not think the 4 camps, nearest us is MANZANAR on Hwy 395 en route to Mammoth, qualify as death camps or concentration camps. It was a horrible and unconstitutional decision by FDR, a huge blot on this great president's 1932 - 1944 record. At the same time, neither killing nor torture occurred, and the goal was not genocidal...it was war fear. And it was never proven that there were ANY Japanese spies among these Japanese-American citizens!You can visit Manzanar as an historical site, and I recommend you do. It is barren and pretty bad; the prisoners cultivated gardens, played baseball, and had little to do...losing great years of their lives. I think there is a John Hersey book, RETURN TO MANZANAR worth reading.

When I was a college student (lo those many years ago) I dated a woman who lived in a teepee in Isla Vista. I had no idea that was disrespectful. I thought it was an ingenious (and courageous) way to get cheap rent. If she is reading this, I wish her well. The relationship wasn't a long one, but I remember her (and her teepee) fondly. It is funny that today of all days (St. Patrick's Day) I am wondering how some people (like those of us of Irish heritage) can get over characterizations of our ancestral culture, and others cannot. My Irish ancestors were treated with distain in this Country. In his retirement years, my great-grandfather had to repair the shoes of the rich in order to survive. The rich were not kind to him and complained about his meager fees (in the fractions of dollars). Yet I am not offended by all the green leprechaun hats and debauchery (the Irish don't black out, you wimps). Why is that?

What an interesting thread of comments about the teepee project. IMHO, this really was an uncreative assignment and the reaction was also predictable. A more relevant project would be to build the type of housing we' provide our military personnel--not the officers--in Iraq and Afghanistan. Modern tents. Alternately, create an abode of the Afghani peasants. Better yet, assign a Geodesic dome, where Art, Math, and Physics converge?

"Yet I am not offended by all the green leprechaun hats and debauchery (the Irish don't black out, you wimps). Why is that?"

Eckermann (anonymous profile)March 17, 2015 at 5:48 p.m

One of the reasons is that Ethnic Studies professors and their acolytes make a lot of $$$ by fanning the flames of racial division, and the Irish are not a politically correct ethnic group.

These people (the professors and professional activists) are like corrupt doctors who instead of curing the problems from which their patients suffer, keep their patients sick so that they can keep coming back and paying them each time they visit.

I wish that Eric Heras's Apache ancestors could come back to look at Eric's complaint. I think they would see him as entitled and spoiled with little to do with his life except to complain about petty issues.

It is true that 200 years ago, his ancestors were suffering REAL degradation, starvation, abuse and cultural genocide. I really believe that if Eric's ancestors could see this, they would find it humiliating, embarrassing and petty. Apaches were a proud people, not a bunch of petty whiners.

These comments are showing an asinine level of ignorance and glossing over of U.S. history. I was on the fence about this issue before reading this thread, and now have to voice support for those Native Americans who were offended by the somewhat beautiful, but inarguably insensitive and unthoughtful, teepee installation.

Can any of you opposing the decision tell me what people are comparable to the Native Americans when taking into consideration: 1) the hugely successful attempt at genocide of an entire people (over 90% of the population slaughtered/killed/wiped out within the span of 150 years on THIS soil, as well as central and southern Americas - this did not occur somewhere else or by some other people - read the article - SBCC is a Chumash burial ground), 2) the intense psychological attempts to annihilate an entire culture (the common practice of kidnapping of Native children and forced entry into boarding schools far from their tribal homelands by the U.S. government, stringent prohibition of such practices as speaking their native tongue, wearing their native clothing, celebrating their rituals/religion/values), and 3) the recency of this deplorable oppression and killing (Geronimo died in 1905, Native Americans were not even considered humans until the mid 1900s). These atrocities are within the lifetime of many living today, they are not the distant past or something those whose families underwent this should have 'gotten over' by now. The significant residual impacts continue into today.

I am an SBCC student, I saw this teepee and was not offended, though I am half Native American. I thought it was lovely and planned to look at it up close, but when it was taken down early took some time to reflect. I do not understand the mentality of not stopping, stepping back, and reflecting, but rather attacking those who were offended and minimizing the incalculable trauma and terror their ancestors were subjected to. I do not understand it, though judging from these 84 comments it is the rule, not the exception. And attacking with such zest, sarcasm and attempts at crass humor, of all things! To say something like near genocide and annihilation of an entire people had a definitive end is simplistic and reproachfully dismissive.

What right do any of you have to tell Native Americans they are unreasonable for heavily safeguarding aspects of a culture that were all but wiped out by the founders and first generations of European colonists of this country? Don't tell me you are Irish, or French, Chinese, or African, or any of the people across the globe subjected to terror and slaughter by Europeans. None of those people were the mass, sole and long term inhabitants of this land, this very city we now call paradise.

Remember where you are, remember who was here before the colonists of this land. And pay some respect.

Urbanite best get back to reading comprehension because everybody commenting has acknowledged and condemned the atrocities which were not in the lifetime of anyone living today (better study some US history). Your heart might be in the right place but your brain is in outer space. Thanks for the example of asinine commentary. Only Fascists use the term "cultural appropriation" to justify their censorship. The teepee was just fine, it's censors like you who are the insensitive selfish ones.

Hey SBCC student urbanite, please show some gratitude for all those who have sacrificed so much just so you could take low-cost classes at SBCC, because they believed in you and your future in this country right here and right now..

New rule: only two generations and the guilt card expires. If you don't like that rule, then do rend your flesh over the witch trials in the Middle Ages. And once you are done with that, I can add to this perpetual guilt card list ad nauseum.

However, you miss the biggest point- one unhappy reaction to this class project along with a bunch of outsider side-kicks should not bring an entire class to its knees without far more academic due process protections than what just occurred at SBCC. We fought for the principle of due process too, which you just kicked in the teeth..

So I am offended you ignore this principle so carelessly. Gaskin's instant mea culpas were equally disgusting. No one is ignoring or excusing any prior history. But we are tired of petty self-interest groups who get stuck in the past and then use it to beat up everyone in the present. If you got this nonsense from an SBCC class, ask for your money back. They failed you.

Ken, if someone acknowledges the atrocities in one breath and in the next cajoles and make lights of offense that might have been taken, that completely delegitimizes any pretended condemnation. The majority of these comments are loaded with sarcasm and judgment.

So in your opinion it was not an atrocity that Native Americans were not considered humans until the mid 1900s? In your opinion the mid 1900s is not in the lifetime of anyone living today? What about the 70s - when Native Americans were granted the right to vote?

I was not a censor. I clearly said I am half Native American (Apache coincidentally, as well as Yaqui and several indigenous tribes from Mexico) and had no issue with the teepee. What I have issue is with are these comments, and people telling others whose recent ancestral experiences are incomparable to any people who did not inhabit this land for centuries and were subjected to genocide that they are unreasonable for feeling the way they do.

Also, no one censored this. All they did was in the case of the Native American group, voice their reaction, and in the case of Gaskin, provide a forum and opportunity for open discussion. The artists made a decision to take it down early. Likely they realized they put very little thought into it and after hearing the perspective of Native Americans, made a decision. A lot of the commenters could take a lesson from these students.

Botany, you have no right to say I owe gratitude to anyone. However, I am grateful for my low cost classes - offered to all students of all nationalities. The people who sacrificed for it are also of all nationalities and backgrounds, so what your point is I really don't understand.

The European colonists wreaked havoc on the indigenous people of this land in a manner that rivals or exceeds any horrors experienced in the history of mankind. They were hugely successful in their attempts of genocide. That is an objective statement.

As for your new rule - you must have an overinflated sense of self thinking any 'rule' you pull out of thin air in an online comment thread means anything. Like I said, isolate any oppressed group across the globe you want - none of them are Native Americans who were the sole inhabitants of this land for centuries, and who were subjected to slaughter en masse. Oppression by a people claiming freedom and justice for all was a primary principle they believed in.

Also, let me respond to what is IN YOUR OPINION the 'biggest point here.' No one forced or even unduly pressured the artists to take it down. They made that decision themselves after listening to the reactions of a group. So are they to blame for the conscious and dismantling of their own work?

The story reported both sides were unhappy with the outcome, particularly Mr Heras who hurled even more threats and demands he was not satisfied with the administration grovel nor the project's censorship. Don't start your brand of historical revision in less than 72 hours.

There was no enlightened kumbiyah moment of harmonic convergence as you present. Nor have we had access to the in-house dialogue either. The topic is far deeper than the tee-pee. It is the PC, and our general fatigue with race-hustler "rights" activists. Meditate on that, urbanite.

ken and jovis or mavis or whatever his name are lovers and defending each other. they were so upset about there not being a parade during gay pride so that is why the are defending each other and bashing everyone that does not agree with their racist view on all of this. Calling mr heras chief thin skin and yet you want equal gay rights what is your deal you hypocrites. Good for you urbanite!

And ken I and will see you and your man on sunday at wild cat. We have you regular booth ready. please do not be mad that i wrote this love ya

ken and jovis or mavis or whatever his name are lovers and defending each other. they were so upset about there not being a parade during gay pride so that is why the are defending each other and bashing everyone that does not agree with their racist view on all of this. Calling mr heras chief thin skin and yet you want equal gay rights what is your deal you hypocrites. Good for you urbanite!

And ken I and will see you and your man on sunday at wild cat. We have you regular booth ready. please do not be mad that i wrote this love ya

Urbanite, do yourself and the rest of us a favor by seeing Dinesh D'Souza's recent film "America". In fact get your whole class to view the film so you can all get a healthier perspective on the dimensions of your current tirade.

JarvisJarvis, like I said I am an SBCC student. Through emails made available to students by staff/instructors I was reliably informed it was a decision made by the artists. That was an important detail the Independent writer left out. I wonder whether it was accidental. Glad I can provide some insight.

Nowhere in the article does it say the artists were forced to dismantle the teepee. The plain and simple truth is they were not censored.

Ok, you have general fatigue with race-hustler "rights" activists. Thanks for the advice, but that is probably the last thing I would spend my time meditating on. Understand I have general aggravation with those who dismiss history and actions such as attempted genocide, rape, pillage, dehumanization and long and sustained oppression, and cry foul and fatigue, did you call it, because a group they do not belong to cares about safeguarding their culture that was nearly annihilated.

Surfergrl thanks for your kind words, and I agree name calling like Big Chief Thin Skin is prejudiced, insensitive and juvenile on a MONUMENTAL scale, but I have to say your last comment, though I am sure you were responding to JarvisJarvis and Ken out of frustration, is also offensive.

I have great respect for diversity and all members of the community, including those in the LGBTI community. This is why I think topics like this are important - there should be ongoing open dialogue and an abundance of safe, welcoming spaces for the underrepresented and marginalized in our society. It was probably a joke, but whether JarvisJarvis and Ken are lovers or homosexual has nothing to do with this thread.

Is surfrgrl on crack? I ask myself the more I think about her nearly incoherent comment. My man died a year and a half ago, I rarely go to the Wildcat. Are you trying to infer that being gay is something to be ashamed of? Really? Did you really think you were outing me? Are you that petty and dumb? Love me? You're too dumb to even know who Iam!

urbanite, get your facts straight and recognize who threw the gauntlet down that set the tone for the rules of engagement that led to this devolution of the "discussion".

You continue to ignore the issue of outside agitators coming on campus to ad hoc set campus policy. This smacks of the recent UCSB porn prof taking campus policy literally into her own hand and attacking persons in the campus free speech zone. Recipe for chaos.

Go back and review campus operations that exist today and ask why this group did not engage them, rather than demand this immediate ad hoc confrontation regarding their personal, subjective, and essentially defamatory demands.

A student had a grievance - what process currently exists for a student hearing on that grievance that does not immediately engage top campus administration, require an immediate face to face and with other campus groups, allows outside agents to participate in making demands on campus operations creating an intimidating environment, allows the demand for immediate reparations with no ability to appeal any initial resolution by other interested parties.

If you find the student grievance policy lacking, then work to change it structurally. Mob violence, and this smacks of mob violence and capitulation no matter how you choose to later report it, is the danger.

And it academic freedom can be tossed out the window every time outside agitators show up with a demand list, it is time to toss out faculty tenure as well because its slim justification also just got tossed out.

The rule stands: two generation statute of limitations demanding reparations for past grievances. PC fatigue - it is real. Deal with it. Go over to uber-lib edhat and see the reactions to this incident over there too.

Let's hope the Independent secures copies of the in-campus online dialogue regarding this incident which has not been made available to the general public. We will all learn when we see how our educators are dealing with this hot topic on our campuses today.

I continue to recommend you see the movie "America" and also read the recent article in the National Review by the Univ of Colo "conservative in residence" faculty member who assesses the PC campus climate today and its multiple failings and sloganeering that passes for liberal arts education.

To disengage anything other than liberal PC approved perspectives in the classroom cheats every single student in today's hot house higher education environments. You are getting cheated because you are getting indoctrinated, instead of educated.

Now write us an extra credit essay on the merits of the Tea Party today, and we can bring some balance back to this discussion. I strongly do recommend you get a subscription to the National Review or check it out at the library and pay attention to other points of view.

NO Ken, surfgrl was completely unintelligible. Urbanite, take a little time and read about what the English intentionally did to my direct and not very distant relatives, including but not limited to massive starvation, no due process, loss of land rights etc. The first time I went to stay with one of my uncles in Ireland and I watched kids in the park with British Troops walking around them with automatic weapons while armed vehicles circled the streets. To this day the bigotry, lack of self rule, and oppression are 100x worse in comparison to how any minorities are currently treated in this country.People like Heras are pussies that protect themselves in the culture of victimization. Grow up, Stand on your own. Don't blame anyone else for your lot in life. Every racial or religious group has been through hell at some time in their life. What Europeans, in majority the Spanish by the way, both inadvertently and intentionally did to the Native Americans of North America was sickening and largely met the standards for the entire world at that time.When the British starved millions of Irish it was sickening. When Pol Pot killed millions of Cambodians it was sickening.When Mao killed millions of Chinese it was sickening.The entire African continent perpetually tries to kill itself.

And some pseudo "Native American" is offended by an art project?

I think we need "Piss TeePee" to see if the same folks that defended Piss Christ will stand up and be counted...

I made a teepee w/ the blanket this morning, the wife, who happens to be of "Native American Indian" descent, was not offended in ANY way, in fact, she was very pleased before and after. What's the problem?

JarvisJarvis, in reading over what you take real offense at (campus policies and a mutual decision between two groups), I am even more surprised that you lack the empathy or wherewithal to step outside yourself and realize what might matter to others (not you). Can you at all see why this might be important to someone else (not you)?

You seem to have a very narcissistic mentality, judging by your continued insistence that this ridiculous 'rule' you made up be given ANY consideration whatsoever. This rule that anyone two generations removed from attempted genocide and cultural annihilation loses all legitimate rights to take offense at watered down and thoughtless representations of their culture. I am sorry, that is simply ridiculous.

Who are you referring to as 'outside agitators'? An SBCC student had a complaint and contacted a group directly involved in issues of this matter, who contacted the school to create a dialogue. The school was receptive, and so were the creators of the installation. It adds a complexity to the issue that SBCC is on Native burial grounds and the 'outside agitators' may in fact have more real and direct rights to address this issue than anyone. No one demanded anything and no one forced anyone to do anything. What is it you are so angry about? No one tossed academic freedom out the window and there was absolutely nothing even minutely close to 'mob violence' taking place. You using that term is equivalent in exaggeration to me simplifying/intensifying the matter with a statement like 'racists set up a mocking effigy on campus' - again, ludicrous.

I get that you're not happy about the decision. I think I got that 50 comments ago. And if I have any free time anytime soon I will check out your video and essay, though I have to say the manner you represented yourself throughout this thread doesn't make me eager to read through what you find relevant. Also, I am not a liberal arts or ethnic studies major, I am a science major, but I do believe in basic human rights, empathy, and respect for diversity and culture. Indoctrination is multi-layered and occurrs on many levels - of all things, cultural respect and sensitivity is not something I am concerned about being 'indoctrinated' with.

I think surfergirl and urbanite simply need a little bit of context of the members who post here to understand what's happening.

All of the regulars here completely expected Jarvis to make a racially insensitive and inappropriate comment and I think the vast majority if not the entire community does not condone those statements.. however, most of us generally agree with the message behind his comments once you get past the innapropriateness. At least in this case... However you will find that on 98% of the other stories here Ken and Jarvis have completely opposing viewpoints.

nomoresanity, the experiences of your ancestors and the current population is deplorable, and as you say, simbiotic to what groups all over the world have experienced throughout history.

The Native American experience is unique because the attempted genocide was largely successful. By sheer numbers. Over 90% of the total indigenous population was decimated on THIS soil and the Americas. This land, the city of Santa Barbara we call a paradise, where the basic need of shelter is in a crisis - was a home, a paradise for indigenous people for centuries. European colonists raped, pillaged, slaughtered and oppressed.

It is also unique that the slaughter and oppression continued by the very hands of people and under the governance of those who were fleeing religious persecution and advocated so heavily for democracy, equality, and freedom and justice for all. Native were not considered humans well into the mid 1900s. Natives were not given voting rights in the U.S. until the 70s.

This is not the distant past, and this is not a foreign occurrence. This is not something that took place somewhere else under foreign rule. This happened right here. It really cannot be compared to any other people if you look at the scope, numbers, history, and geography. Boarding schools forcing Native children to abandon their culture and identities were at a peak in the 70s. The 70s. Less than 50 years ago. To take children from their families and force cultural annihilation on them, and 50 years later pick and borrow from that culture because it looks pretty, without regard for what was done - is insensitive. To ridicule and call what in terms of the timeline could be the son of someone whose cultural was forcibly destroyed a 'pussy' with a victim mentality for safeguarding an aspect of it is simply hateful and unreasonable.

"And if I have any free time anytime soon I will check out your video and essay[.]"

urbanite (anonymous profile)March 18, 2015 at 11:34 a.m.

Seems like you have plenty of free time. But how much time is it going to take for you to get the simple fact that people are pissed that a benign art project was censored? That is all this is about. No one here hates Native Americans (I hope) and the art students weren't trying to disrespect anyone by erecting a structure that looks like something that some of the native people of this land lived in a long time ago.

loonpt, thanks for the context. I am an extraordinarily busy person and this is the first time I commented on a thread, and it was well after 1, 2, 3 - 60 insensitive comments. The level and abundance of ignorance and insensitivity expressed surprised me. The readiness to insult, degrade and harass the student who was offended disturbed me.

I do see that a majority likely agree that the teepee was not offensive, and have heard a variety of opinions on campus these last weeks too. I am half Native American and saw the exhibit the first day it was up and also was not offended. I thought it was lovely. BUT I would never conceive to tell another Native American, Heras for example, who actually shares my ancestry, that he has no right or reason to feel as he does.

I guess what I don't understand on a basic level is why people who have no Native ancestry think they have the right to tell Natives what should not be offensive to them. I maintain that no other group can be compared to Native Americans if you look at the fact that this occurred right here where we stand, by the colonists and founders of this country, as recently as it did, and to the scale that it did.

PCU stands for "Port Chester University", however it supposed to imply that it is a "Politically Correct University".

The President of the school is a very progressive type who supports all of the left-wing "causes" from the "cause-heads" who take up a different political cause each week, to the gay rights activists, black rights activists and of course you can't forget the "womenists" or feminsts.

Nobody has any fun at the school because they are constantly filing complaints that what everybody else is doing is insensitive, they can't even have parties because the feminists come in and protest, chanting, "This penis party's got to go!! Hey Hey!! Ho Ho!!" and then they file complaints with the school. Sexual promiscuity is at a minimum since the girls at the school tend to file complaints against any guy who hits on them.

All everybody does for the most part is play intramural ultimate frisbee and take liberal arts classes.

Then there is a right-wing Reagan worshiping underground fraternity on campus called "Balls and Shaft" as well as the pro-party, anarchist-esque house called "The Pit". The right-wing group teams up with the progressive school administrators and left-wing groups in a conspiracy to get rid of "The Pit", mostly because they want their house which apparently used to belong to their group.

In the end, The Pit throws a big party and shows all of the left-wingers how to have fun again, causing a break-down of the establishment and everybody is happy except for Balls and Shaft and the progressive school administrator who is fired.

The End.

Moral of the story - stop trying to ruin other people's good times. Stop acting like a victim all the time just because other people like you are or have been victims. Most importantly, relax and have fun. Life is too short.

sacjon, the project was not censored. It was not censored, its dismantling was not forced. The artists decided to do it after discussion. So really, the simple concept you present is not a true statement.

I get that people are upset it was taken down by mutual agreement 2 days early. No one anywhere in this thread said that the art students intended to offend or disrespect, we can all agree on that. But it did offend, and after some discussion and thought a decision was made. The historical information I included in my comments was intended just to prompt a small amount of thought and reflection, and maybe instead of clinging to an initial simple, annoyed or 'pissed' reaction, THINK about the matter of cultural appropriation, specifically as it relates to Native Americans.

The project was CENSORED, by intimidation. No amount of sugar and smiles changes that, no amount of spin.Urbanite you can't even think for yourself, stop telling others how to think. Your historical info is inaccurate (surprise) Seriously you're like a left wing Sarah Palin, can you see India from your porch?Many other groups experienced what the Native Americans did, ever hear of the Congo?

No other group was the indigenous, long term inhabitants of THIS COUNTRY/state/city and nearly decimated by this country's colonists in recent history. That is my point. Geography, recency, and historical context bear a factor. The teepee was erected and displayed on a Chumash burial ground (SBCC), not on a college campus in Africa, Ireland, France, or Japan.

When the President of the College tells you take something down, it's censorship by intimidation as I stated previously. You're really bad at cherry picking Urbanite.It may once been a Chumash burial ground, it's now a College Campus. If you feel so strongly about that, maybe you should vote with your feet and go to a different school not on hallowed ground.

So personal ranking of which atrocities are "worse" is apparently the criteria, solely, in this case, of Native Americans? BS. Tell the Mexicans that were still openly and intently exterminating their own Native Americans through the 1970's.Ever been to Cambodia and seen the efficiency of the Khmer Rouge? I have. Let's ask some of the folks that were not murdered over there about this ridiculous teepee controversy...Grow up.I will from this point on support removing CC entirely from the their current site because it is a Chumash burial site. Maybe they can move it to the casino, make it revenue positive, and build an enormous multi story dorm for the out of town students...

with 122 comments here and counting, and thinking of political correctness AND censorship, what about hikers and horse-packers who roam the backcountry photographing pictographs and entering sacred Chumash rock shelters? http://www.independent.com/news/2015/...Should we attempt to place all these off-limits, just as we have barred the sensational rock art and Painted Cave up on the 154?

Yes, D'Souza was convicted for a campaign donation violation. Admitted and accepted. See the movie anyway. How else can we seek common ground.

David Petreaus needs to first schedule his hearing under oath with the Trey Gowdy Bengahzi committee. Then we can talk about his future. And everyone else who gets swept up finally under oath, regarding that still unresolved incident.

Over on edhat someone is saying the administration is washing their hands of this entire incident. Still claiming this was a mutual decision once the class members realized "some people" were upset by the art project. Well, isn't that special.

Well, I am upset it got taken down on the most specious grounds. Put it back up now, or else I will be very upset. I'll bring along 8 of my best Tea Party friends and we shall demand an immediate meeting with those students involved who mistakely tore this class room project down. Do not ignore our outrage and our concerns, or else you are insulting our culture.

Independent: In the meantime, you may wish to retract your statement both sides remained unhappy with the final outcome because the story we are getting now is all concerned did have a harmonic convergence moment and the original student complainant apparently was misquoted when he had allegedly demanded further blood to be spilled.

Hope the new bike paths SBCC is putting in allow riders to back-pedal because that looks like the newest competitive sport at SBCC.

Google "predecessor guilt"- doesn't show any results for any "memo". What is the statute of limitations on genocide, or murder? When do the treaties that weren't kept lapse? How many promises broken to you have you forgiven?A responsible teacher would have had the sense to tell the 'art' students to consult with local natives about what would have been appropriate. BTW- the Chumash didn't live in teepees. When the Europeans got here they had houses arranged in rows with beds off the ground. They practiced organized agricultural methods. Nobody here suggests going back to what was before( suggestions they do demonstrate a lame attempt to ignore the issues that are relevant) but it would show some connection to your heritage to acknowledge that you live in a land where someone else had been over 10,000 years and it was taken by force, violence and criminal behavior, even if your ancestors weren't part of it. If you appreciate what we have in Santa Barbara, you might want to consider how authentic is your connection to the land if you think nothing earlier than two generations is relevant. The people in power- predominantly white European descendants- created this weird sovereign nation inside a nation status and also awarded some of those nations semi exclusive franchises on exploiting human nature through gambling. Those who take issue with either need to have an alternative solution to the problems those attempted to address before trotting out these tropes.

I'm with KV and the addition of Pink Flamingos to the curriculum. I would also like to add Blazing Saddles. And as an oddball addition throw in Letters from Iwo Jima to demonstrate how we are all really the same to cut through the idiotic rhetoric from the pro apologist crowd...

Here is the absolute statute of limitations on "predecessor guilt". When all the predecessors who allegedly committed these actual crimes and dead. Which means one generation max. I was in error to extend it to the second generation. A weakened moment of faux-sounding compromise. My regrets.

Apply this one-generation predecessor guilt maxim to every wrong committed in our long history on this planet and analyze what you gain attaching predecessor crimes to any people, group or institutions who have not one whit of culpability for those predecessor crimes.

The only gain is getting to act like a victim for something that never happened to you and blame others who also never did anything to you personally.

No where in that argument is anyone asking history of any prior abuses to be wiped on the books. And you can rant about it all you want. But you simply cannot make others today pay for predecessor crimes, or demand they act in ways YOU decide honor those predecessor issues.

You can get laws passed if you want that require some sort of eternal reparations. But what you cannot do is walk on a public campus and unilaterally demand a class cease their class project and call this a "mutual" accommodation.

I only hear the action of thugs demanding and getting their way. And then demanding even more after the "mutual" concessions were reached .I hear no concessions by the aggrieved party to the other side of this alleged two-way conversation.

Here is what I heard, admittedly only from the Independent story, with a few 3P fillers.

1. You are dissing my ancestors. This is my unilateral decision.2. Remove project now, and not a moment later.3. Okay, but we didn't mean any harm. Who are those strangers at this meeting telling us to also tear this down now?4. Project removed and this is now called only a "slap on the wrist". 5. Then we hear you want even more reparations for the putative disrespect, even though none was ever intended.6. BTW you are trespassing on my ancestors sacred soils so you are now doubly guilty of disrespect.7. And all of society is guilty, not just SBCC.

Urbanite: You can talk all you want (as opposed to saying "you have no right to say" or "don't say") about the horrors of the past, and while it may please you to relish in victimhood, some of us want to avoid repeating the horrors of the past, and make a better future for everyone.

Crying foul over a nicely-done teepee won't erase the past, nor make for a harmonious future.

By the way, google "Assyrian Genocide". Luckily for me, my great-grandparents got out of that part of the world before the long arm of murderers got to them.

Be thankful we don't have to live with those horrors and let's ALL try to make this a better world.

nativego, clausen has actually showed me his plans for his casino and they are very modest, they go as follows,

he only wants a 1500 square foot building with four slot machines. A big camel statue (which would remind visitors of clausens ancestors riding through the deserts of Turkey and Iran,) would greet visitors out front. Three smaller mechanical camels would would also be placed inside, where for a quarter on could get a ride like what one would get on a mechanical bull. If one can stay on the camel for three minutes, they get one free shot at a slot machine.

If one wins the grand prize, they one a one week vacation to Bakersfield. Second prize is TWO weeks vacation in Bakersfield.

The place will be called "King Nimrods paradise". (Must be 18 or older to participate)

dolphin forgot to mention the t-shirts that bc is having printed for those folks that successfully remain seated on the mechanical dromedary or bactrian camels, these shirts will proudly read: CAMEL JOCKEY and will be much sought after and loved by all races and genders that emerge victorious from "Sandpit".I want one with a shamrock under the letters to show my Irish Pride.

Then tried to stick their tipi name on their shabby repackaging of my ancestors original engineering. It never ends when you are looking for trouble. Gimme shelter from these bogus PC storm troopers, puhleez:

Clear, direct, intentional objective unambiguous "hate speech" is one thing. Subjective interpretation of neutral or ambiguous non-verbal symbols as one person's version of "hate speech" is s bridge too far.

Oklahoma - probably the former; SBCC definitely the latter. In fact one could find the aggrieved SBCC party's own reaction in response to the neutral non-verbal symbol is far closer to actual hate speech, than what he claimed he was protesting.

He needs to read Alice in Wonderland, if he truly wants to be sensitive to other cultures.

This current brouhaha (African) reminds me of the Indian (real India) story about Kisa and the Mustard seed. I dedicate it to Mr Heras and all the other budding PC harassers in the world. Age appropriate 4-7:

Uh, oh. Moab Under Canvas. How could anyone get a good nights sleep knowing they were sleeping in such blatant symbols that are a reminder of European imperialistic aggression. Hope Hilary goes not choose Moab for her fun camps, even if it is the deluxe tent with teepee option:

"(Aunt of deceased Tupac) Shakur says of herself on her website, “I am a 20th century escaped slave. Because of government persecution, I was left with no other choice than to flee from the political repression, racism and violence that dominate the US government’s policy towards people of color.”

In addition to the demand for honoring Shakur by renaming Barrows Hall, which had honored a former UC president, the BSU wants a resource center for black student development, two full-time black admissions staff members, two black psychologists who are sensitve to “the racially hostile campus climate at this university,” more money, and a push for increasing the present percentage of black students, faculty, and senior staff, according to WND.

The BSU threatened, “If we do not receive a written response from Chancellor (Nick) Dirks addressing in detail each of our individual demands as they were presented, by 5 p.m. Tuesday, March 17, we will understand that the chancellor has not prioritized the dire needs of black students on this campus.”

"(Aunt of deceased Tupac) Shakur says of herself on her website, “I am a 20th century escaped slave. Because of government persecution, I was left with no other choice than to flee from the political repression, racism and violence that dominate the US government’s policy towards people of color.”

In addition to the demand for honoring Shakur by renaming Barrows Hall, which had honored a former UC president, the BSU wants a resource center for black student development, two full-time black admissions staff members, two black psychologists who are sensitve to “the racially hostile campus climate at this university,” more money, and a push for increasing the present percentage of black students, faculty, and senior staff, according to WND.

The BSU threatened, “If we do not receive a written response from Chancellor (Nick) Dirks addressing in detail each of our individual demands as they were presented, by 5 p.m. Tuesday, March 17, we will understand that the chancellor has not prioritized the dire needs of black students on this campus.”

Statute of limitations expired too long ago to even listen to this sacred land seizure nonsense. Snooze, they lose. One generation over and out.

Unless they of course pay all the prior taxes on the land, reimburse for all the improvements, and make a fair deal to the present legal owners for fee simple if they ever find a court that would perfect their ancient claims.

Otherwise, can they please stop playing games and get serious about their own contemporary lives on modern terms?

Where is it written anywhere that it you stand on a piece of property you own everything for all time in every direction. There were only a few hundred thousand alleged "native Americas" occupying a fairly limited amount of land is discrete areas on this vast continent. Nope, they don't now get to claim they "own" all of America. Not by a long shot.

Was the forced migration of Indian tribes a crime against humanity? Yes, no question about it. It ranks right up there with all the other crimes against humanity that are part and parcel of human history. Nothing more and nothing less for those that directly suffered from any such similar heinous act by force against will.

But none of us today ordered that migration and no one today is suffering directly from that dark episode, unless they want to turn the clock back completely to also go back to their former lives of hunting and gathering, wearing animal skins and existing on corn as their dietary staple. Day after day after day.

The missions wanted souls to save. They had no extermination agenda at all. No one at the time knew about disease transmission, so neither side was able to offer protection; any more than Europeans were able to protect themselves from the Black Plague.

Cortez wanted plunder and killed to get it, but he did not enter our part of North America. Mexicans rewarded their oppressor by taking his language and racial identity as "hispanics" which always seemed odd. Pizzaro did his damage in South America which was not much worse than what El Nino did from time to time on its own - wiped out entire civilizations.

Never heard much about De Anza being a particularly blood thirsty or oppressive soul, mainly just curious about what this New World had to offer to them - but perhaps I err here.

Chumash came to the missions, assimilated and hung around on their own terms regardless, took away some benefits from this experience as much as some liabilities they equally suffered.

Problem none of us where there as independent eye witnesses, so demands for present suffering from speculation or exploitation of this very short period of history gains nothing for anyone today. Except gratitude on both sides what happened in the past is no longer happening today.

The Chumash making demands today for the SBCC property is as legally valid as the Quaids coming back to squat on property they once owned in Montecito.

Except CEO Gaskin immediately apologized to these bogus usurpers for their "hurt feelings". Not sure anyone apologized to the Quaids when they asserted their own similar invalid property rights. Just the opposite. We could easily see they were nut cases.

RE: selling ethnic studies classes. During the entire history of slavery in the US 450,000 slaves were brought to this country.. Yet today there are 45 million descendants from those original US slaves. That is a big potential market for ethnic studies classes to rehash past grievances.

(BTW: Over 600,000 people died in the US in the Civil War to bring an end to slavery.)

Louis Gates: "450,000 Africans who arrived in the United States over the course of the slave trade. Incredibly, most of the 42 million members of the African-American community descend from this tiny group of less than half a million Africans."

All other subtopics aside, this was censorship (getting thread back on track) and censorship is Fascism.In a Democracy, we must always be on guard against Fascism: whether it comes with a jackboot or a smile, from the Right or the Left; whether it's meant with malice or the best intentions.

Now how do we deal with the official SBCC party line this was a "mutually arrived" decision to prematurely tear down the entire class project due to the complaint of one student?

Kangaroo courts and star chambers are meaningful discussion topics. What SBCC policy got established by this incident and will it be now universally applicable.

What were the alternatives had the two groups not reached this "mutual" decision? When one side gets everything they wanted and the other side walks away with nothing, what is fair or principled about that?

Or was that de facto evidence the art student group got thugged into a "mutual" decision and were too intimated to ask for anything in return?

We weren't there. We don't know. But Volok is right a "smile" can be just as intimidating as a jackboot when asymmetrical warfare is in operation and no over-arching principle emerges from the encounter.

1) Those claiming terror and cultural annihilation of Native Americans happened more than one generation ago, consider this. The population of Native children forced into US boarding schools was at its height in the 1970s. These children were taken from their families without consent and shipped to 'schools' varying distances away from their homelands. Try for a moment to imagine the pain, trauma, and confusion these children experienced.

In these 'schools' there were a number of deplorable and traumatic practices relating to cultural annihilation. Children were forced to cut their hair (regardless of what significance hair length bore in their native culture - to many it was sacred and directly attached to spiritual wellbeing). Children were forced to change their names (basic forms of identity from birth) to English names. Children were forced not to wear their native attire, speak their Native languages, practice their religions and rituals, or communicate with their families. All aspects of their culture were suppressed and forbidden.

This occurred in the 70s. I wasn't born yet but I am sure quite a few commenters on here were. So, many children who were kidnapped from their families and whose cultures were forcibly destroyed by our government are still alive today. There is the one generation for you, JarvisJarvis. Even your arbitrary and ridiculous rule holds no weight in this conversation.

I know regardless of how people many feel inflated senses of self/ego and righteousness when they embrace an anonymous online identity, many people will agree that children are the most precious resource we have and the overriding sources of love and beauty in the world. Many would agree that children should be honored, nurtured and loved above all else. Think of your own children, grandchildren, nieces, nephews. How would you feel if they were taken from you and forced not to live in the ways you raised them, in the ways that were special and worthwhile to them and their culture for generations? How would you feel if they were taught that who and where they came from was something lesser, something wrong in an elemental sense, something to be abhorred and changed irrevocably?

Many of these children are alive today, and are raising children of their own. Now I ask you - can you at all see why their children may be 'sensitive' about picking and borrowing from the culture by the very people who tried very hard to destroy it about 40 years prior? Because something looks pretty, without a second thought?

2) Gaskin did not tell the artists to take the teepee down. It's as simple as that. They were not censored. There was a meeting where they heard the dissenting perspective of more than one person. They took time to consider it and CHOSE to dismantle it. Nothing was demanded or forced b y anyone. That continuing to be asserted is a refusal to acknowledge reality.

3) If the installation was simply an architectural structure, dome-like, a shelter, then it should not have been given the title 'teepee.' That title has a specific affiliation, that title was given to it by the artists - Tea in the Teepee. Teepees originated from the Native Americans, not any other people.

What disturbs me more than anything in this discussion is not the teepee or the artists' decision to create it, or their teacher's arguable oversight in approving its installation. I said from the beginning as a Native American I never had a problem with the teepee. I wholly believe there were no negative intentions.

What disturbs me is the lack of empathy, the lack of stepping outside yourselves, the dismissal of our atrocious RECENT history, and the degrading, harassment, and namecalling against Heras. I am disturbed by bold racism, and the continued degradation and marginalization of a people who have suffered momentously by the US government.

I don't plan to write any more but if I can leave anyone with any lasting consideration it is to think about the Native children who were kidnapped and told they needed to suppress and forget who they were, and become something else. 50 years ago, not 200. I don't see how anyone with any level of reason can say this is something that should be gotten over by now. I don't see how anyone with any level of reason thinks they have the right to tell these children or their children how they should feel about cultural appropriation, or that it doesn't exist.

urbanite, the teepee is gone so get over yourself and move on. You succeeded at your cause. Almost all ethnic groups have suffered autocracies over time. Some groups grow up and move on, others whine incessantly forever. I am sorry that your gray matter doesn't comprehend that society is tired of rewarding victim hood. More PODER please..

urbainite, talk to Lois Capps. I didn't vote for her but you probably did. Because no one in Santa Barbara today personally committed any of the atrocities that upset you.

One person did demand this structure get taken down - you don't own the name "teepee" which has in fact been patented by someone else. Just because that one SBCC student showed up with a pack of outsiders to intimidate the SBCC art students does not prove it was a mutual decision. Why was it reported "both sides" were unhappy?

Just as likely the art students felt they were dealing with some over-emotional nut cases and it would save them a lot of grief if they just tucked their tail and ran rather than put up with more of your grievance threats.

Those SBCC art students did nothing to "your people" either. Find who carries the power you claim is still oppressing "your people" and then target your ire at them; but keep the rest of us out of your personal warpath.

When someone makes up the rules on the fly and then also demands to enforce them you have the worst possible scenario for all concerned; not unlike what you claim "your people" are still facing with the BIA. How do two wrongs make a right.

Take it out on the BIA. Take it on on Lois Capps, but stop making a fool out of yourself and your cause taking it out on an art project that has nothing at all to do with the immediacy of your stated cause, other than making a PIA out of yourself.

The comments on this article are a perfect example of why anonymous postings by persons hiding behind the safety of their computer screens should be outlawed. Back when there was a little bit of integrity left in the press, people who wanted to comment on an article or editorial were required to submit their name, phone number and address so the paper could verify their identity before their comments would be published. Now any idiot with access to a computer and an email account can spew whatever venom they desire and not be held accountable for their racist, insensitive and inflammatory comments.

Urbanite, I am sorry that you had to read the offensive comments left by the human waste that troll articles such as this one with the sole intention of garnering a reaction from people who wouldn't otherwise give them a second thought. You know how childrearing books talk about how kids will oftentimes act out when they aren't getting enough attention from their parents because "negative attention is better than none at all"? That's what's going on here... JarvisJarvis, Ken_Volok and the rest of these pathetic trolls who have nothing better to do with their lives than leave comment after interminable comment trying to bait people into responding are nothing but attention-hungry recluses who need to get a real life and stop hiding behind their computer monitors all day (and night) long. JarvisJarvis posted 49 comments on this thread... seriously, bro? If you are living in Santa Barbara, California and have this much free time on your hands, you're obviously doing something wrong. Considering the fact that you could even conceive of some of the thoughts you expressed, i'm not surprised you had to resort to trolling the Internet and making racist comments to get attention. Maybe you, ken_volok and the rest of the idiots who left comments designed to hurt people who have never done anything against you should check out a chatroom for socially inept singles instead.

The ANONYMOUS poster “iammadeofyou” wrote: “The comments on this article are a perfect example of why anonymous postings by persons hiding behind the safety of their computer screens should be outlawed.” End of quotes.

It is a person such as this who wants to know who a person is, what they do, where they and their family live. Not because of some spurious “moral” reasoning that might better enable mankind to achieve greater heights, as they imply would be the case, but because they are cyberbullies or worse who want the revenge they cannot get without such information.

billclausen: "Cowardice"? Here's an example of what TMI can do: How about the recent ISIL tactic of researching "social media" for names and addresses of families of soldiers, then ordering their slaves to kill them?

Yes, you are a jerk who believes in free speech. We can agree on that point.

I guess I need to reiterate what was stated in my previous post, which was directed to "Urbanite", not you. Many of the comments made on this article (with the exception of a young and obviously idealistic SBCC student named "Urbanite") are inflammatory, racist and filled with hate. Nobody is advocating that any of the trolls who left their revolting comments be denied their right to free speech. I was simply explaining to Urbanite that people such as JarvisJarvis, Ken_Volok, nativeson, and others are seeking attention through this medium because they lack the ability to get it any other way than from being reprehensible and cruel.

Native Son: I don't care who you are, what you do, or where you or your family live. I was merely recalling a time in the past when members of a community were required to provide this information so the newspaper could verify their identity prior to publishing a letter purporting to be from them. As I stated, these days anyone with a computer and an email address can post whatever hateful, untrue, racist, misanthropic comments their spiteful little souls desire, and, like cockroaches venturing out of the woodwork, others of their ilk soon come scurrying out to join them.

In this entire comment thread, only 2 persons showed any kind of humanity - Surfergirl and Urbanite. These two commenters were immediately set upon and attacked by the rest of the posters, none of whom would even warrant a second thought by these 2 persons on an ordinary day You posters (and you know who you are) are pitiful and your addiction to trolling the internet looking for opportunities to get the attention you so desperately crave is sad and pathetic. Any argument you hoped to make to prove your point was nullified the moment you began talking about gambling dens, gin joints, going on the warpath and demanding scalps. The hours you spend crafting comments designed to incite are truly a waste of time.

There once was this guy/gal who got online and started bashing everyone who made comments with which he/she didn't agree. Then, he/she just started posting constantly, exactly like the other posters who he/she had just berated for posting so many comments. I thought his/her name was Hip O. Crit, but turned out it was iammadeofyou.

Iamyouetc has a very interesting (and convenient) set of definitions. Agree with me or else you are hateful, pretty much sums up his world view.

He/she does need to read for content better, instead of imposing his/her own emotional reactions to what he/she thinks he is reading. But this has not been a teaching moment for him so a yawn is the best he/she can muster. The topic is beyond his present ken.

But alas, this is the new generation we have harvested out of public PC K-12. And it is their world to inherit. Racing to their brave new world, together. Others such as myself are merely grains of sand in the history of mankind ready to be swept back out to sea again.

Hint to Iamyouetc, stand back a bit, don't chose sides and look at the format of the argument as well as your subjective version of its content. This is a teaching moment.

Urbanite - this comment is directed solely to you... since I have no way of personally contacting you, I have to do it through this forum & hope your previous experience with the posters on this thread has not banished you from reading any further.

As you can see from the recent comments, a person cannot win against these trolls . They will twist anything a person says to suit their own personal agenda. You have to learn to ignore them because really.. who cares what they think? They are hateful trolls.

Second, I'd like to relate to you something I witnessed when I was a child. I was in our family car & my dad was driving down 19th Avenue in San Francisco, right in front of SF State University. There were many police cars parked on both sides of the street trying to keep the peace between 2 groups obviously at war with each other.

On one side was a throng of people wearing white robes & pointed white hoods covering their faces. They were yelling through bullhorns across the street at people who seemed enraged. The people they were yelling at were ordinary passersby... some might have been university students, others probably were residents of the neighborhood. Some might have just been driving by, saw what was going on & decided to join the crowd. All the people across the street from the ones with the white robes and hoods were Caucasian.

I didn't know it at the time, but what I was witnessing was a Ku Klux Klan rally. The Klansmen chose to hold their rally in front of SF State, a college campus in what has to be one of the most liberal cities in the U.S. They chose to exercise their right to free speech in a place where they knew they would get a reaction and they accomplished their goal. As we drove slowly down 19th Avenue, I watched ordinary white people, their faces completely contorted with hatred & rage, screaming, yelling, flipping off the Klansmen and struggling against the police because they were so incensed at the views these rabble-rousers were expressing.

The point I'm trying to make is this: hateful people have been around since the beginning of time and nothing you do will ever change all of them. They always manage to find a way to elicit reactions from people. From the kids in kindergarten schoolyards who make fun of their weaker/poorer/less intelligent classmates to the online trolls searching for opportunities to demean others in order to make themselves feel superior... these people will always be around. I have to say that upon reading the original article entitled "Tempest in a Teepee", I kind of sided with those who felt that the college should have just let it stand. But after reading your comments and receiving your insight, I changed my mind. And not one single drop of Native American blood flows through my veins.

Thank you for your bravery and for showing us what type of new generation will be inheriting this world.

Wow, so one or two people are offended by something an innocuous as a teepee and proceed to jump over any and every one that disagrees with their very one sided view... One even goes so far as to advocate that anonymous posters be outlawed, ironically from an anonymous ID. Either someone is a half wit or they're confused. Which is it Iammadeofyou? Are you a moron or a just confused, very confused person?

Either way the original complainer is a baby. Its not the world that needs to adapt, its you. Get over yourself. Just because you are hurt or offended by something doesnt mean that the offense is 1) real 2) worthy 3) matters at all.

You hit all three in this case. The world is a big scary place and 99.999999999999999999% of people dont give a damn about your perceived interpretation of some maligned historical events. Not too mention that who the hell do you think you are to speak for all Native Americans? Talk about ego!

It sounds like some coddled whiners were told they were smart far too often by someone who was just being nice. I'll go ahead and tell you the truth since you've obviously been lied to for most of your life. You're not smart. Not at all.

Am I just a moron or am I just confused? Well, Sam, let me answer that question with another question - if I were a moron, why would you bother to wonder? Wouldn't you be able to discern this for yourself?

As for being confused, naw, bro... I'm good. Although I've been confused about SOME things along my journey, of one thing I am 100% sure - you and the rest of the idiots commenting on this thread and spewing your vitriolic racist hatred are the morons. You crave the attention you cannot obtain by other means so you get it the only way you can - by posting comments on an article and trolling for innocents like Urbanite to respond. So you can all jump on him or her and show off your big vocabularies and superior intelligence. Not impressed.

"Perceived interpretation"? Uh.. right. What does that mean, again? I'm not smart - not at all, so maybe you can enlighten me.

Read over your comment and see how many grammatical errors, misspellings and/or typos you made, then come back and tell me who the moron is. This article is the first one I've ever commented on in "The Independent", and I notice this website actually allows you to preview your comment before posting it. Are you really so anxious to post your views that you risk looking like an idiot by not fixing grade-school level language errors when telling someone he or she is a moron or 'not smart... not at all"? Pffffftttttttt.

It's certainly understandable why you'd rather focus on correcting minor grammatical and spelling errors than to address the content of what you are attempting to defend. You seem more interested in defending political correctness at the expense of free speech and you classify anyone that disagrees with you as a racist and filled with hate.

If I were you, I would rather focus on grammatical and spelling mistakes as well than to try to defend that position.

Wow - iammadeofyou and urbanite are pretty darn similar. "First time" ever posting on this site, not offended at first by the teepee but then got angry after reading comments they didn't like....

Is this just urbanite talking to him/herself and trying to draw sympathy? Was that a black helicopter I just saw? What is that bright light and those gangly alien-looking things? Wait, help! Tell my wife I love heeeeerrr....adsfkhjasd f

First you advocate using violence to prevent individuals from posting anonymously online by making it illegal. Posting anonymously online has many benefits. It allows people to post unconventional or controversial opinions for a more comprehensive discussion of certain topics that might normally be marginalized by an editor at a media organization and may never see the light of day otherwise. Most importantly, posting anonymously is a non-violent activity and so there is no reason a person should be subjugated to violence for engaging in it.

Second, you do exactly the opposite of what you should be doing upon the realization that some posters may be doing so for attention by giving them attention. What you should do is not give them attention. In your story of the KKK having a rally in San Franciso, it seems the best solution would be to have nobody show up and ignore them and their racist notions.

I've already stated that Jarvis made inappropriate comments since urbanite came in and admonished us for not doing so - I didn't think that needed to be done, I thought it could go un-said that what Jarvis said is inappropriate. You seem to be judging all of us here as if we made the statements he made and that is a big mistake. However it is an even bigger mistake coming from you than from say urbanite because you have a higher awareness of the reason for the posting. I don't think it is fair for you to judge everybody who did not admonish Jarvis when we realized a long time ago what you just came to the realization of. We have all admonished Jarvis plenty of times for these sorts of things and doing so would just be giving him more attention and more material to reply to.

I agree with you that it is a tragedy that even as recently as 40 years ago Native Americans were stolen from their families and tribes and had their heritage ripped from them. You have to admit they probably lived in poverty and were being given much better opportunities than what they had, it certainly does not make it right. One problem is that the traditional Native American lifestyle is not compatible with the government owning 80-90% of the land in this country and not allowing people to freely travel and homestead open lands. The traditional Native American lifestyle could be compatible with a free society, if we had one. I think it would be awesome if there were traditional Native American tribes roaming the countryside and mountains who respected others property rights and were living the traditional lifestyle. The problem is as soon as one of them steals or murders somebody, people freak out and would want to make the entire practice illegal, which is likely what was occurring during colonial times.

I tend to let "minor grammatical and spelling errors" slide, but when the person posting them asks me if I'm a moron or just confused, I kind of feel like it's my duty to point out their mistakes for the next time. Because you know...if a moron like me can notice them, God knows what all the geniuses commenting on this thread might think!

Sacjon: That's funny. I got it. Now you've opened up the door to some more racist invective from your fellow cockroaches... who's gonna be the first to take the bait?

Ken_Volok: Oh man... I expected so much more from you! Guess I have to wait for JarvisJarvis to check in for some worthy commentary.

Yes, indeed iamamdeofyou, it appears that you are a moron. Thanks for helping us prove that point. I believe the venerable Forest Gump said it best when he said "stupid is as stupid does..."

You wrote: "Read over your comment and see how many grammatical errors, misspellings and/or typos you made, then come back and tell me who the moron is."

Did you really finish a sentence with a preposition when you're trying to admonish someone else for poor grammar? Sorta, kinda, makes you appear a fool. Doesn't it?

One of the most telling signs of an idiot is how upset they get when they're called an idiot... You exemplified this phenomenon better than most. Congrats! Maybe you should stay in the sandbox if playing with the big kids makes you scared.

Ken, You were beaten twice? Didnt you learn the first time that skinheads are dumb asses with violent tendencies? Hopefully you didnt try and "talk" with them like one of these moron academic advocates that populate our community. You know the type. They're the cause of this entire incident. Idiots who have been coddled and catered to their entire lives and couldn't last a week in the wild without their pacifiers and warm blankets and the cover of their mothers breasts...

For the record: I dont waste my time editing posts for perfection. The point of these comments is not to adhere to some style guide or standard, but to communicate openly and without fear of retaliation or otherwise. Something our iammadeofyou seems to miss completely.

"BTW as someone who sustained serious physical injuries in two separate attacks by Nazi skinheads, if you're offended by a teeppee you're a pussy. Come cry to me when you have blood and scars."

Ken, it's very possible that Eric was made fun of when he was younger and maybe even attacked - it's also possible his attackers mocked him for being Native American and perhaps made references to him living in a tepee. We don't know for certain. Let me ask you, if the Nazis setup a Nazi art project at SBCC, would you advocate that it be taken down?

People who have experienced trauma often relive that trauma when they are exposed to "triggers". Seeing the tepee may have triggered a lot of really negative experiences for Eric, or based on experiences he has had with other Native Americans perhaps he thought it could trigger something for them and so he was trying to help them.

So what's the solution?

The problem is that ANYTHING can be a trigger. A person who is raped by Priest in a church may become fearful of stained glass. If somebody builds a stained glass art project, should the school remove the project so that this person doesn't experience further trauma? I certainly don't think so. It would be better if they got over their triggers. Buy stained glass pieces for their house until it doesn't remind them anymore maybe, I don't know. It probably takes a lot of hard work, good life experiences with other good people and maybe some therapy to get over things like that.

My point has always been that the students who setup and participated in the project were not the same people who would have made fun of or attacked Eric for being Native American. Eric should have joined in and tried to find common ground with these folks. Try and gauge what their purpose was for building the art project and what their feelings are about Native Americans and the traditional Native American lifestyle. Then maybe these types of things can become positive triggers, he can associate seeing a tepee with cultural acceptance and friendship instead of all of the negative stuff. The administration, his mentors from the tribe or someone could have suggested this route rather than taking the project down, but apparently nobody important did.

Sam, I was minding my own business both times! First just walking down the street with a friend. A second time they infiltrated a party, attacked me then got their asses kicked. And later got their asses kicked again by a buncha Rasta friends of mine.

Loon, as disgusting as it would be to see such a pro-Nazi art project I have to go with the Constitution (and ACLU) over my own feelings.For example, "The Passion of Christ"- I'm not gona waste three hoyrs of my life watching an antisemitic snuff film but I defend the right to make, show and see. It's the tradeoff of Freedom of Speech/Expression.

Atta boy Ken. There is not much in life more satisfying than kicking the ass of some racist, bigoted ahole who cant shut their trap.

Its obvious that our iammadeofyou is a student who hasnt spent much time outside the bubble of academia. He wouldnt last a week in the real world as his skin is far too thin and his ideals far too cloudy for any normal workplace or dynamic environment. He's a HR nightmare. The type of person always crying and complaining... We all know the type and we all hate the type...

Only a coddled, bottle fed academic would equate grammar to intelligence. Its important that he realize that some of the most successful, intelligent and lauded people in our country suffer from dyslexia. Did you realize that your comments are so insensitive iammadeofyou? You basically insulted those people challenged by such things... Ironically, while trying to stand on your own moral soapbox and admonish others for much less. That makes you a putz by the way. A real mashugana.

Iammadeofyou claims as a child he witnessed and event in 1980. Do the math, it appears this person is not a typical college-age student, but rather what once was called, several generations ago, an "adult".

One assumes SBCC still has a student senate and an academic senate. Generations ago those would have been the appropriate bodies for redress of grievances. Of course, all bets are off under the modern gaia-chaos theory of college administrative management.

Just show up with a mob, issue your demands for immediate resolution and administration grants you an instant kumbiyah session sweeping in all accused parities, by-passing any formal protocol or use of traditional representative bodies whose interests will also be affected by the outcome of this ad hoc gaia justice.

Sam, you can daydream all you want about who or what I am - the one thing you can be assured of is that I am NOT a student, have never spent time within the bubble of academia, and have lasted not weeks, not months, but decades in what you refer to as the "real world".

I do realize that everyone's perception of the real world differs but to brand me a coddled, bottlefed academic just because I responded to your query about whether I was a moron by pointing out the many grammatical errors in your post is just typical of the flawed and erroneous manner you and the other posters on this thread engage in to promote your agendas of moral superiority over non-members of your elitist little trolling club. I have no idea who you are and I honestly couldn't care less. I'm commenting here just to let you know that you could not be more wrong about me. Even though I'm not an academic, an English teacher or a proofreader, I do have the ability to recognize elementary school level errors and notice how you and your fellow cockroaches all twist others' words around to extend an argument that doesn't exist. How can you make the jump from you asking me if I'm a moron to me insulting the many "successful, intelligent and lauded dyslexics" in our country by asking you why there were so many grammatical and spelling errors in your post?

Apples to oranges, baby... your arguments just don't add up. And by the way, I don't know what a putz or mashugana is, but if it's something you consider offensive... well, thank you for the compliment!!

Knew the term "teacon" was cloyingly cute, but did not realize how cute:

"Teacon Imperial Dogs specializes in true tinies shih tzu. We breed for dogs that are 3 to 5 pounds grown, with big eyes and tiny high set noses on darling flat faces. Short and cobby, our dogs look like puppies even as adults."

Thank you iammadeofyou for the comments and encouragement not to be impacted by opposing views, especially those prejudiced/hateful in nature. I appreciate another perspective. And no, we are not the same person. We differ in our comments in pretty significant ways.

It bothered me when I read through about 80 comments responding to no dissenting view, that varied in levels of insensitivity, offense and ludicrosity. There was a made up 2 generation rule applied to oppressed groups in which they have a right to voice offense, then 1 generation, then when it was made clear neither of these could be applied to Native Americans, something about 'no one living in Santa Barbara today personally hurt any Native American living today' so no Native American should take offense at cultural appropriation - still don't get the logic on that one, though like before, the assertion is obviously false to begin with.

I thought about classmates going online and what a discouraging and dismissive overall mentality it presented, so decided to comment.

The level of ignorance (from posters who seem to value their level of intelligence) about the scale and recency of atrocities committed against Native Americans disturbed me. This is U.S. history after all. This is Californian/SB County/City history. It is still ironic and alarming to me that so many don't know or don't care what heinous acts occurred en masse on the ground they are standing on in the RECENT past. Native Americans weren't recognized as humans until the mid 1900s, boarding schools abusing children and practicing cultural genocide was at their height in the 70s, and Native Americans weren't granted to right to vote until the 70s.

It delegitimizes your entire argument in my opinion to claim oppression of Native Americans happened 200+ years ago. Essentially, you don't know WHAT (the abuse and oppression) you are talking about, so how can you speak on, much less assert your confident opinion and recommendation, on the WHY (aversion for cultural appropriation and the way Native Americans should feel)?

It seemed JarvisJarvis and others were interested in attacking Eric Heras as an individual, reiterating completely erroneous information about what happened (remember, the facts are no one forced the teepee removal, no one was censored, the President did not tell the students to take it down, it was a mutual decision), interjecting information having nothing whatsoever to do with the issue, and fueling a fire against the opponents of the teepee.

That bothered me a bit, but now at over 200 comments I think I have the context loonpt referred to.

On the other hand, I was heartened I went to the SBCC facebook page and read the majority of reactions to the post about the teepee expressing SUPPORT for the opponents of the teepee, embracing Heras' view, and VALUING cultural sensitivity. I felt much better at reading relevant/cohesive responses pertaining to the issue from my peers.

Sam-Tababa, you have no logical reason to say people who disagree with the teepee's presence have been 'coddled' or 'catered to' - what do you actually know about their individual or collective histories? For being so adamant about free speech, what you have to say to Native American rights' activists certainly sounds a lot like shut up and sit down. You may not like the fact that the teepee was dismantled, but guess what? No one is asking your permission to voice their offense, they are standing up, and they will be heard. They were heard. It got taken down, the people who created and installed it took it down after minimal education, and take my word for it, no one is going to try something like that in the near future.

Besides that, loonpt, I guess yours are the comments I want to respond to. To me you are the most reasonable of the group against the teepee dismantling. You said:

'I agree with you that it is a tragedy that even as recently as 40 years ago Native Americans were stolen from their families and tribes and had their heritage ripped from them. You have to admit they probably lived in poverty and were being given much better opportunities than what they had, it certainly does not make it right.'

This statement starts out logically enough, but it ends with huge and again, erroneous, assumptions that I can only assimilate with a blind trust in an authority that had committed terrible crimes against humanity. Is that the mentality of the majority trickling through? Specifically that even though they were taken from their families and their culture forcibly destroyed, that they were 'being given much better opportunities than what they had.' This isn't true by any stretch of the imagination. It would be if the people tasked with the forced assimilation were trustworthy and had positive, however misplaced, intentions. They did not. They were enacting an attempted cultural genocide following the attempted physical one. Actually, something I did not mention was the documented and rampant and horrible incidents of physical, mental and sexual abuse these children experienced in the boarding schools. It was an atrocity - those children should not have been taken from their homes and families.

In another comment loonpt, you make an analogy about stained glass and an individual sustaining abuse at the hands of a priest in a church to Heras' complaint. You compare the glass to the teepee as a trigger, and argue that one should attempt to make the trigger positive instead of negative. I don't think this is analgous at all. Maybe if there was a population of hundreds of thousands raped by priests in churches and they were the original and rightful inhabitants of this country for centuries, and the priests were the colonists and organized government who not only raped, but made and broke treaties, pillaged, murdered, abused systemically, etc.

Your comments at face value were semi-reasonable, but when looked at in depth are not really reasonable at all. And that is disturbing, that to me the poster with the most perceived diplomacy and reason makes assumptions and claims of this severity.

I stand by what I said before. I didn't have a problem with the teepee. But it is downright ignorant, condescending, and unreasonable for anyone to tell Heras he shouldn't have a problem with it. And it was not an individual who took offense. That has been written a lot and was very wrong every time. It was an entire group who took issue and felt the offense was valid. And if you visit the facebook page, this group is expanding by number by the day thanks in no small part to the original teepee installation. So it did serve a great benefit, after all. Sounds like education taking place, I am glad to be in the midst of it.

That one-generation predecessor guilt rule gets under your skin, doesn't it. It does strip away rationale for perpetual victimization which appears to be an unsettling concept for you. As it should. You still miss the main points of the arguments here, when it is not going off the rails into name calling. (Moi included with my Big Chief Thin Skin - mea culpa)

And no, any online mob reactions at SBCC are not germane to the fundamental due process issues you keep ignoring. This student reaction was entirely predictable. this is what kids do, this is what K-12 indoctrinated them to do - stick it to the establishment. Same thing, different issues happening on campuses up and down this state.

But I recognize you don't have the experience level to appreciate the other deeper points of the discussion. All I can hope for is indeed the arguments against perpetual predecessor guilt and arbitrary trigger point demands work their way into your deeper consciousness. But there may be no contextual experience in your life to make these subtler points even matter.

Your real beef is with BIA. I hope you do discuss this with Lois Capps because she is the one who can do something about this. Otherwise you are flailing at windmills trying to take everyone else down as surrogates for perpetual predecessor guilt.

Apples to oranges, baby... your arguments just don't add up. And by the way, I don't know what a putz or mashugana is, but if it's something you consider offensive... well, thank you for the compliment!!

iammadeofyou (anonymous profile)March 23, 2015 at 3:23 p.m.

Somebody once said to me, in speaking of other co-workers: "What a bunch of Yutzes!" I asked "what's a Yutz", so he says to me "Do you know what a Putz is?"...to which I said, "yes", then he replied "Now you know what a Yutz is!"

I just had to share that, and I'm sure you all are most grateful that I did.

The student art project posted on March 5 was installed on the West Campus earlier this month as part of a performance art course.

The student group explained that they chose this particular time-based art piece for several reasons including the interest they had in the architectural form of the structure and the desire to create a space for connectivity, engagement, and reflection.

The installation of this art piece offended our Native American students and community. The art students, their professor, and members of our Native American community met March 9 and engaged in a heartfelt and authentic dialog.

A mutual decision was made to collaboratively dismantle the project.

The college apologizes to all who may have found the installation disrespectful of the Native American culture. We can assure you, such an intent never entered the minds of these art students or their professor.

As an educational institution, we seek to cultivate in our students intellectual curiosity, exploration, growth, and understanding. Unintentionally in this situation, that journey led to pain, hurt, and feelings of disrespect.

No one wishes that upon fellow students and members of the community. To our Native American faculty, staff, administrators, students, and community, we are sorry.

This important topic of cultural appropriation and its impact, the college, the American Ethnic Studies Department, and the Student Equity Committee will hold a forum on Tuesday, April 7 from 12:45 – 2:15 p.m. in the Garvin Theatre.

The presentation and discussion will be given by Assistant Professor Craig Cook and other faculty colleagues. We encourage everyone to enjoy us in this dialogue.

meshugannah [spelled variously] is Yiddish for "crazy" and we use it colloquially for "fool" or "idiot". Legally, it means truly nuts, like many of the tedious comments above. The main issue here really is censorship.

I know I didn't read many of 'em...but KV, while I also truly detest "censorship", in Germany, for example, pro-Nazi words and terms are literally prohibited. Would that be acceptable censorship given their tangled history?

"And if you visit the facebook page, this group is expanding by number by the day thanks in no small part to the original teepee installation. So it did serve a great benefit, after all. "

NB: The SBCC Facebook page was reposted above. Among the nearly 30,000 SBCC students, there were 27 likes and 9 dislikes, meaning there were net 18 voices in favor of the censorship out of 30,000 SBCC students.

Urbanite continues the ringing threat of future censorship (aka tyranny by the minority):

"You may not like the fact that the teepee was dismantled, but guess what?

No one is asking your permission to voice their offense, they are standing up, and they will be heard. They were heard.

It got taken down, the people who created and installed it took it down after minimal education, and take my word for it, no one is going to try something like that in the near future."

Then take down anyone who gets in your way. But wipe that silly grin off your snout, because it keeps you from looking like a down-trodden victim of centuries of White imperialistic abuse and exploitation.

Though you may still have a class action claim against SeaWorld within the one-generation statute of limitations rule for generalized globalized grievances.

Ken_Volok, what is your opinion on the subject of child pornography? Can you come up with any reason why the censorship of this kind of exploitative filth would not be justifiable?

And while we are on the subject of "censorship", I guess I am not understanding exactly why so many people on this forum are crying foul. According to the excerpt posted by JarvisJarvis, the project was removed by "mutual decision reached after the artists and the offended parties had a heartfelt and authentic dialog".

In my experience, artists tend to have a certain type of temperament. That temperament tends not to just go along with the mainstream movement. If I, as an artist, put my time, effort and talent into a piece of work that was on display in a public space and some people came forward and said that it offended them, there is no way I would ever take it down unless there was a damn good reason for it. Why is it that you cannot accept a decision that was made BY THE CREATORS OF THE ARTWORK THEMSELVES to dismantle something that was offensive to a particular segment of the student population, and believe that they, as adults and as the creators of the piece, have the discernment and the right to do as they wanted with their creation? Nobody forced them to take it down - they came to their decision on their own, after listening to the reasons why it offended the Native Americans who viewed it!

Who are any of us to say what should or shouldn't offend someone of a different heritage? If everyone here is in agreement regarding non-censorship and the right to free speech, why do those rights only apply to one side of the coin - in this case, the artists rather than the Native Americans? Why shouldn't the Native Americans who were offended by this artwork be allowed to express their views without being ridiculed and mocked and called names like Chief Thin Skin and crybaby?

The excerpt posted by JarvisJarvis says it all... the 2 groups met, a mutual decision was reached, the teepee was taken down. The artists who created that teepee are adults and fully capable of defending themselves and their rights to freedom of expression. That they decided to dismantle their artwork speaks to the fact that they have far more sympathy and humanity towards their fellow students than the majority of the posters on this comment thread.

What I posted and identified was the SBCC Facebook entry written by SBCC - the official party line, that apparently very few are buying. It was posted because Iamoneofyou claimed there was overwhelming support for the protestors position on the SBCC website.

Okay net 19 likes out of 30,000 students. In today's world of new math, i suppose you can call this a landslide endorsement for censorship.

Iammadeofyou, glad you are finally coming around the the policy issues this teepee tantrum triggered.

SBCC set a new ad hoc policy, if one person protests a class project can be torn down by "mutual decision".

So apply that to what someone now claims is "pornography".

Same SBCC rules now apply: one offended person can terminate the project. Though it works best if that offended person shows up with a pack of like-minded thugs to exacerbate the threats of their demands.

When someone makes the comment "Censorship is never justified", I take that to mean censorship is never justified. So you're saying that censorship is justified when the item being censored is illegal? In other words, censorship is justified in some cases?

You conveniently ignore the main point of my comment, which was, "How is it censorship when the artists themselves voluntarily took down the artwork after engaging in a heartfelt and authentic dialog with the parties who felt offended by it?"

Can you answer that? Or are you projecting your own fantasy of student artists being forced by school administration or peer pressure or whatever to dismantle something they made with the best of intentions because some crybaby thinskinned Native Americans invoked that age-old, widely-recognized syndrome of "predecessor guilt" upon them, and being so young and innocent and unable to defend themselves, they simply caved? These are college students living in the United States of America - they deserve a little more credit than that!

Hell, I am deeply offended by iammadeofyou and think he should be immediately removed from public and our community.

The reason so many people are upset is that this issue, is a non-issue. Yet for some asinine reason, it became an issue. Why? Because one idiots feelings were hurt. Is it possible that that one person's feelings were the problem? Not the inanimate object?

If we placate to every whiner, every complainer, what will we be? Certainly not a community that lives on common ground.

Iammadeofyou, Get on a plane and go see how most of the world lives and your petty, tripe meaningless complaints about this issue will pale in comparison. They will disappear quickly as you see first hand how most people live and survive. They dont have time for such meaningless complaints or petty concerns over what may or may not have happened to their ancestors. We all have ancestors who were denied freedom, suffered discrimination and were systematically murdered. Its happened to every ones family at some point in history. Every one.

Get over yourself and maybe, just maybe you can muster the empathy towards people who are actual suffering, today. And not placate to some paltry, petty activist who is obviously in dire need of validation and perhaps a hug.

SBCC is the one reporting this "mutual decision" was reached after a "heartfelt and authentic dialog". We have not gotten straight talk from SBCC now in years. They lied about Adult Ed. They lied about Measure S. So whatever.

Back to the ad hoc SBCC policy issues and the egregious subjectivity of this new college operations policy: mutual decisions reached after heart-felt and authentic dialog.

And those determining if "heart-felt and authentic dialog" actually took place? This was a public process that set new SBCC censorship policy. Make the tapes public - Brown Act requires nothing less than for the people to learn how their public institutions spend their money.

JarvisJarvis, you seem to have me confused with another poster. I haven't seen the SBCC official page regarding this tipi project so I really don't know what you're talking about. Please do not ascribe comments made by others to me.

You contradict yourself in your post. First you say, "SBCC set a new ad hoc policy, if one person protests, a class project can be torn down by 'mutual decision'".

Then you state, "Though it works best if that offended person shows up with a pack of like-minded thugs to exacerbate the threats of their demands".

So which is it... is it that one person protested (expressed to another party) that the tipi offended him, or "a pack of like-minded thugs" demanded threateningly that the artwork be torn down?

Are you the moderator for this comment thread? Who are you to tell me that "I'm finally getting around to the policy issues this teepee tantrum has triggered?" Is there a rule that the only issue to be discussed here is the "policy issues" that you feel were violated? Do you have a copy of the written policy regarding artwork erected on the SBCC campus? Does it state somewhere that when a person feels offended by something that is erected on their university campus, there is a defined protocol that must be followed consisting of this, this and this? And that in this case, the protocol was NOT followed and the artwork was dismantled without due process? I'm asking this because I want to know, not to be a smartass. Obviously, this is an important issue to you, so you must have done the research on it.

Protocol on a college campus with regard to a piece of art that will never be seen by me except through photographs is not what is important to me. What is important to me is the racism displayed in your posts and in many of the posts appearing on this thread. It sickens me to read the words that obviously-educated persons such as yourself and others on this thread use to describe those of a different heritage. You yourself admitted that you used derogatory references to Native Americans in your postings and you are well within your right to do so, just as I am well within my right to say you're a troll.

I was under the impression that this comment section was for anyone who wanted to express a view on the article or on the comments that were posted. My comments were mainly directed towards Urbanite, a Native American who had the misfortune to stumble upon this thread and read the hateful and racist rantings of a bunch of internet trolls. If your intention was to engage in a calm and rational discussion of college policy issues with regard to "culturally-sensitive" affairs, then you missed the boat when you started throwing out your racist comments. That's what got me on board here and you can try to make me look like a fool by saying I was off-topic, but the real fools are you and anyone else who thinks that it's okay to put down people for their heritage or their beliefs. Peace, brothers.

Sam_T, you jump to conclusions without knowing a thing about me. You want me to get on a plane and see how the rest of the world lives? I'll see you that and raise you one higher. I didn't just SEE how they lived outside of the U.S., I lived in a 3rd world country for over 2 years. And during that time I saw enough "actual" suffering to last me for the rest of my life.

What exactly are my "petty, tripe and meaningless complaints" about this issue? Can you name them? I don't consider calling out posters making racist remarks and denigrating the right of a person to express their views regarding something relative to their native heritage "petty". And by the way, did you mean "tripe", or "trite"?

I'm glad I deeply offend you and I'm glad you think I should be removed from public and your community. Guess this means you want to censor my voice, huh? But it's ok, cuz everything's different when you're the one doing the complaining and making the rules about who should be listened to and who shouldn't be. Again I ask, who are you to judge what can and cannot be said here?

Here is what it is Iammadeofyou: thugs usually carry more weight in "mutual decision" processes, which is why some form of due process needs to be protected. Thugs can make offers the other side can't refuse and that is not really mutual. Outside grievance mongers had no business at the SBCC table in this dispute that one student had with an academic program.

Unless this is now SBCC's ad hoc dispute resolution process - get your feelings hurt, make sweeping demands, take it to the press and demand even more and show up with your posse of like minded souls to have a "heart felt and authentic dialogue.

Whatever, if this is how SBCC choose to now operate, so be it. But don't claim they want to protect faculty tenure at the same time when the political winds can take away academic freedom because of one person's whimsy, "heartfelt" or not.

I suppose all concerned turned on their ET heart lights to validate this subjective response.

Iammadeofyou, here is a little trick I learned a while back. If you want to know something, you type it out on your own computer's search engine box and up it comes. Here is SBCC's student grievance policy and protocol to follow to ensure due process for all concerned:

How was this SBCC's stated policy followed in this situation, and when will SBCC's new ad hoc student grievance policy replace this outdated published policy. Is there any policy to change policy? Or does it just organically evolve by mutual and heartfelt consensus.

"iammadeofyou" you are way too dull and imbeccelic to have come from my loins. If you don't know the difference between rape and a work of Art... yeah I'd say iuntellectually dishonest coward hiding behind a keyboard.. what is your name again oh exalted hypocrite?

Thanks for the link, JarvisJarvis - you just proved my point and showed how your hysterical cries of Censorship! Undue Process! SBCC not following procedure!!" are nothing but a bunch of hot air.

Here is the direct quote from the SBCC.edu link you provided pertaining to their written Student Grievance Policy:

"Preliminary Action1. The student who believes an injustice has been done to him/her shall first attempt to resolve his/her grievance by consultation with the following persons in sequence:a. Accused faculty/staff member(s) or administrator."

Here is a direct quote from the article above:"A wooden teepee erected Wednesday, March 4, as part of a Santa Barbara City College art project was dismantled the following Monday after Native American students complained to school administrators,"

Ok, so it looks like "Native American students" followed protocol by following Step 1.a. of the written procedure.

Next:

"2. If the student still believes that the issue has not been resolved to his/her satisfaction, he/she should submit a signed statement specifying the time, place and nature of the grievance to the Executive Vice President, Educational Programs or designee."

This step was not necessary, since the structure was dismantled and removed from campus AFTER the dialog between the group of Native Americans and the artists who created the artwork was convened with the assistance of school administrators.

Totally my bad... I thought that because of all your crying and complaining about how SBCC was allowing a single student to bypass their "due process" procedures, you knew what you were talking about. The student didn't bypass it, he followed the procedure TO THE LETTER. As a result of his complaint, a meeting was held and the decision was reached to take it away.

Just because you disagree with the decision doesn't mean that written policy was violated. Your accusation that there is some "new ad hoc student grievance policy" that changed the stated policy you provided holds absolutely no merit.

Everything you write is designed to create hysteria and stir up controversy so that people will respond. You garner attention to yourself under very false pretenses. What you write has no basis in fact (i.e., "Outside grievance mongers had no business at the SBCC table in this dispute that one student had with an academic program") - how do you know that the people who appeared with Heras were "outside grievance mongers" and not concerned students? You referred to them as thugs a couple of postings ago - were you there? Did you see them? Or are you just in the habit of calling people who do not agree with you anything you want?

There are so many other articles to troll on, this needs to be put to rest. Due process was followed and as much as you disagree with the outcome, action was taken on the mutual decision reached.

regardless of everything else, iammade has nailed one minor thing: "Everything you [JarvisJarvis] write is designed to create hysteria and stir up controversy so that people will respond." It's what he does, see, then he happily slams posters' views "like shooting fish in a barrel". Troll and slime ball.

This is like listening your racist grandpa argue against internment camps for the "Japs" in WWII.

Jarvis is ultimately right, but he's racist.

urbanite and iammadeofyou are not racist and have a better understanding of injustices carried out against certain groups of people, yet are hypocritically defending injustices carried out against another group of innocent people (the artists of the tepee)

This could definitely make for a good South Park episode.

I absolutely think there is reason to feel sorry for Eric Heras, but I also think it was wrong to appease his demands for censorship of the other students' project. Jarvis is correct that this precedent could lead to further abuses down the road. What if a feminist student is offended by an anti-abortion group on campus? What if a Christian student is offended by having a Planned Parenthood booth on campus? Those groups have actual legitimate reasons to be offended by the other side's activities, whereas this was more like a misunderstanding than anything. As has been said, where does it end?

Ok, so child pornography is the same as rape now, is it, Ken_Volok? There are actually some who have argued that what I consider child pornography IS art, so I was just wondering what side of the fence you were on with that issue... being that you stated "Censorship is NEVER justifiable", you know?

Get in line behind JarvisJarvis under the banner reading, "RabbleRouser" and "Online Hysteric" with your bullshit arguments.

Exactly where do you infer that I ever mentioned you as my father? I may be dull and imbecilic but thank God you aren't, weren't and never could be my father. And just the thought of your loins makes my stomach turn... just to let you know.

Undue process is one thing, censorship is quite another. I think Jarvis may be incorrect about the violation of SBCC protocols, but the gist of everyone's complaints here is the glaring issue of censorship.

Censorship is, by definition, the act of "suppressing parts [of a work of art] deemed objectionable on moral, political, military, or other grounds." Google it if you need - dictionary.com.

Therefore, because one student objected, based on moral and political grounds, about the art project that looked like something that some native Americans once built for shelter, the art project was "suppressed" in that it was dismantled. It was, in fact, CENSORED.

Iammadeofyou - There is no comparing child pornography (which is, in a sense rape, due to it being non-consensual) to a f*cking wooden teepee. You'd be best to stop slinging that argument around because it's bullshit and you know it.

Loonpt, how is it an "injustice" when the student artists agreed to dismantle their artwork after listening to the Native Americans' concerns?

You people are all operating under the assumption that they were forced to take down the tipi - they weren't! They could have argued that their right to freedom of expression trumped the Native American's offense at their artwork! They probably did - but the end result is they AGREED to take it down. The artists and the Native Americans collaborated in dismantling the structure - the issue was between these two groups and resolved between them - unless we were one of the Native Americans or student artists who were present at that meeting, we have no right to say that the dismantling of the structure was an "abuse". Obviously, the Native Americans expressed their viewpoints on that tipi to the artists and the artists must have felt that they were legitimate, otherwise that thing would still be standing on the campus.

All the comments here are speculation, but they fly in direct conflict with what was actually written in the article. Where do you get that Urbanite and I are hypocritically defending "injustices" dealt to the student artists? Are you really going to compare what the European settlers did to the Native Americans to an open dialogue between two dissenting groups that resulted in the removal of a structure that one group deemed offensive? It's NOT the same thing.

So let's not go all Chicken Little about all these "what if" scenarios on what may or may not happen in the future. Short answer is that any grievances should be addressed in accordance with SBCC written procedure, a transcript of which was so kindly provided by JarvisJarvis. They should be reviewed, discussed and settled the way this issue was and everyone needs to accept the decision rendered. People might not like it, but people need to accept it.

Sacjon, I was not comparing child pornography/rape with an f*cking wooden tipi. If you read my post, I asked what Ken_Volok's opinion was on the subject of child pornography. The reason I asked that is because he resolutely and definitively stated that censorship was never justifiable. I was just wondering whether he felt that in the case of child pornography, it was (justifiable).

Stop putting words in other people's mouths... the posters on this comment thread seem to do that a LOT.

sacjon:You're done because you have no legitimate argument to support your ridiculous statement. You can say whatever you want to (and have) but I know what I wrote and any rational person (i.e., not some online troll who wants to put words in other people's mouths) would conclude the same.

I never compared child porn to the SBCC tipi and your pathetic attempt to twist my words to prove you stand on some kind of higher moral ground is just preposterous.

Ridiculous statement? Not really. And you have yet to disprove the act of censorship. Remember, it doesn't matter that the art students took it down "voluntarily." All that matters is that it was removed based on someone's objection to it.

Where does it say a meeting with the students of the class is authorized; where does it say the student can bring in outside thugs to the meeting with the other students. Why did this student not go to the SBCC student council for remediation, again with elected peers to represent his case?

Not clear if this policy requires the student to be in the actual class or not. What other student grievance policy is there for alleged abuses that are not directly student-instructor related.

The policy states the student and the instructor are suggested to first meet. Period. No outsiders involved. No students charged with the alleged abuse are required to participate. Then if there is no resolution of the original student-instructor complaint, it moves up the chain of command. No where does this policy provide dragging fellow students or outsiders into this kangaroo court; nor should it.

Ad hoc "committees" operating outside of printed policies are ultimately dangerous, set poor precedence, and did deny the students who got dragooned into this process their own due process protections.

SBCC Policy:1. The student who believes an injustice has been done to him/her shall first attempt to resolve his/her grievance by consultation with the following persons in sequence:a. Accused faculty/staff member(s) or administrator.b. Department Chairperson of accused faculty member, or direct supervisor of accused staff member or direct supervisor of accused administrator as appropriate.c. The Dean, Educational Programs for an academic or designee for non-academic grievance issues.2. If the student still believes that the issue has not been resolved to his/her satisfaction, he/she should submit a signed statement specifying the time, place and nature of the grievance to the Executive Vice President, Educational Programs or designee.

iammadeofyou, the fact is that the people here have read two different accounts, one from an independent media source and another from the organization that is trying to contain the situation. The independent media source claims that the art students did not want to tear it down, Eric was not happy because they weren't punished for putting it up in the first place and so the situation ended inamicably. The organization that is trying to contain the situation, SBCC, has claimed that both sides were happy and the situation ended amicably.

Most of the posters here have clearly sided with the account of the independent media source and you have sided with the organization that is trying to contain the situation.

None of us know the real truth.

However you are trying to push claimed facts on everybody that they don't believe.

I think efforts to eliminate discrimination and bias and marginalization based on racial/ethnic/cultural/religious/sexualidentit/yincome/etc are great; we need to increase tolerance. iammadeofyou is a true statement, in addition to a screen name; our bodies are composed of atoms that have been recycled through many thousands of others, and in our holographic universe our actions and intentions and thoughts affect all others. I also think that efforts at increasing tolerance are increasingly alienating and narcissistic, rather than positive and unifying. I don't know if there's been any attempt at mediation in this situation or in the NP ILLEGAL issue, but I know that seeing things from another person's point of view is the beginning of a positive solution that unifies rather than divides people and increases our respect for others regardless of differences in race, culture, .....

I think it's unfortunate that an artwork has been made into a political football. Art sometimes creates controversy and discussion -and that is one of art's valuable functions. In this instance, the creation of a teepee form was not done with malicious or racist intention even though there is an inherent shadow of that in the consciousness of our society. The Native Americans who view the creation of this form have a right to express their feelings. However, in a free society, art as a form of free speech needs protection against those who may find it offensive. Was there really anything here that threatened the Native American way of life?

One of the protesting students cut his teeth protesting the Carpinteria "Warriors" logo a few years back that kept that school in turmoil and the headlines, if you recall. It is what he does.

Offenses are to be found everywhere if you know how to look, and when to selectively keep your eyes shut to others at the same time. Since this phenomenon is out there as our new national agenda, how should a tax-funded public education institution respond to such arbitrary and often capricious grievances?

A comment made in the Independent " The representatives, mostly Chumash, expressed anger, pointing out that the campus is a Native American burial ground." This is factually Incorrect on the west campus.The west campus was gutted back in the 1950's-60's for housing units. Other photos of the west campus also show that it was extensively graded. Who ever is making the claim of burials does not know what they are talking about. It is a shame that the uninformed are being consulted. Excavations in 1972-79 attempted to locate burials on the East side of campus and was unsuccessful. I should know I worked on the cataloging of Mispu in 2007 and no burials were found. The potential for disarticulated human remains is a strong possibility in various pockets of undeveloped portions of some parcels but highly likely to be disturbed due to the development history and grading practices over the years. Lastly, my inside sources tell me that when the students who presented this art project stated the intent was non offensive yet social media posts stated otherwise. It was not until SBCC students read the post they became offended. What was posted did not match what they told the school the intent was. I see that the news did not point that fact out and used this sensationalize approach to dramatize the issue. Lastly, NO CHUMASH ELDER EVER ACCEPTED AIM TO HAVE A AIM CHAPTER IN SANTA BARARA when it was established. I should know I was in the livingroom of the AIM chair when the topic was brought up. I advised that they needed the community approval to set up AIM here and I was told " It didn't matter, no one will ever know just you..." I do not agree to AIM being in SB and while some chumash may have accepted them into the community often times those who claim to be Chumash are not really who they think they are but rather what we call "wannabee's" I am Frank #ChumashMLD

Trip down memory lane when this same student Eli Cordero took on the Carpinteria High Warriors with pretty much the same complaints and demands, but with different outcomes. The demands also at got a full hearing in Carpinteria, instead of the summary justice and execution they got at SBCC. Progress or regression? You decide:http://www.noozhawk.com/article/03180...

ChumashMLD: "Lastly, my inside sources tell me that when the students who presented this art project stated the intent was non offensive yet social media posts stated otherwise. It was not until SBCC students read the post they became offended. What was posted did not match what they told the school the intent was. I see that the news did not point that fact out and used this sensationalize approach to dramatize the issue."

I find it toltally NOT believable that the students involved in the art project were privately racists. But who could blame them if this whole episode turned them against PC bs. Camille Paglia's Sexual Personae should be required reading for every HS and or college art student, ALL the Arts.

Throughout this whole episode I've been reminded of early "Western" films, I mean really early stuff from the 1900s-1930. Native American Tribes were very active in promoting their culture and perspective in films (made by white people.) The Sioux especially were especially prevalent; Thomas Ince hired and brought many to California to act in his pictures.In many of these early Westerns you had former combatants on the battlefield met as peaceful friendly collaborators in the filmic representations of those battles and other stories.John Ford, wrongfully labelled a racist by modern ideologues was an honorary member of the tribe inhabitting Monument Valley. And Ford's films attack racism ALL RACES) head on long before it was fashionable or the insultingly politically correct thing to do. If you think the John Wayne character in The Searchers is supposed to be a hero, you can't see the forest for the trees. And if you think this teepee was offensive, baby you've never been offended for real.I leave you with "The Invaders" (1912)

"Stevenson College, part of the University of California, Santa Cruz, is apologizing to its students for serving Mexican food during “Intergalactic” night.

In a letter sent out to students, the college apologized for having “a Mexican food buffet,” while also featuring spaceships and aliens. The college received complaints saying the combination was racist because of the association between Mexicans and illegal immigrants.

“We would never want to make a connection between individuals of Latino heritage or undocumented students and “aliens” and I am so sorry that our College Night appeared to do exactly that,” wrote Carolyn Golz who had taken this picture of the activities before the complaints:Intergalactic Night

After receiving complaints, Dr. Golz said that the event “demonstrated a cultural insensitivity on the part of the program planners and, though it was an unintentional mistake, I recognize that this incident caused harm within our community and negatively impacted students.”

As a result, Dr. Golz “will require cultural competence training for Programs staff, in addition to implementing mechanisms for future program planning that will ensure college programs are culturally sensitive and inclusive.”"

Check out the latest. UC Santa Cruz served a popular Mexican food buffet at an event that featured an Intergalactic theme.

Campus activists not only screamed racism since this was an obvious slur against illegal "aliens", but campus officials prostrated them selves in full apoplectic apology and now demand everyone across the campus take diversity sensitivity re-programming classes.

"In 1835, the government of Sonora put a bounty on the Apache which, over time, evolved into a payment by the government of 100 pesos for each scalp of a male 14 or more years old. Later, Chihuahua offered the same bounty for males plus a bounty of 50 pesos for the capture of an adult female and 25 pesos for a child under 14. Bounty hunters were also allowed to keep any Apache property they captured. The bounty for one Apache male was more than many Mexicans and American workers earned in a full year"

The Apache have Adam Sandler and Netflix in their crosshairs now. I hope that both sides fight to total obliteration. There is no love lost here. The Apache are one the most barbaric and least advanced cultures of the indigenous peoples in North America. And of course, Netflix is a junk paranoia for the left.

"About a dozen Native American actors walked off the New Mexico set of the Adam Sandler pic on Wednesday over depictions in the script. They are saying that the Western was insulting to “native women and elders and grossly misrepresented Apache culture” according to reports."